More stories

  • in

    I’ve prosecuted more people smugglers than Sunak’s had helicopter rides, says Starmer

    Sir Keir Starmer told MPs he has prosecuted more people smugglers than the prime minister has had helicopter rides, adding “and that is a lot”.The heated exchange took place during a discussion on the deportation of dangerous criminals during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday (20 March).Mr Sunak told MPS: “If it was up to him [Starmer] those criminals would still be out on our streets, and the truth is, if he wasn’t the Labour leader he would still want to be their lawyer.”Sir Keir responded: “I’ve prosecuted more people smugglers than he’s had helicopter rides and that’s a lot.” More

  • in

    Watch: Sunak faces Starmer at PMQs as Tory rebels eye up new prime minister

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailWatch as Rishi Sunak faced Sir Keir Starmer at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, 20 March, ahead of his expected appearance before the 1922 Committee of backbench Tory MPs.The prime minister will address Conservative MPs as he looks to face down reported attempts to depose him.Mr Sunak’s appearance before the committee will honour the tradition that a Conservative Party leader appears before it at the end of the parliamentary term.Rebels have reportedly talked up the prospect of House of Commons leader Penny Mordaunt replacing Mr Sunak in Downing Street if he were to face a no-confidence vote before the general election.Ms Mordaunt, who has campaigned in previous leadership contests, has said she is “getting on with her job”.It comes as the Conservatives trail heavily in polls; according to Ipsos’ February 2024 UK Voting Intention, Labour are at 47 per cent (-2 pts) while the Tories sit at 20 per cent. More

  • in

    ‘We are ready, just call it’: Starmer challenges Sunak over general election

    Sir Keir Starmer challenged Rishi Sunak to call a general election in a heated exchange during Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) today (20 March).The Labour leader told the Commons: “Violent prisoners released early because the Tories wrecked the criminal justice system, 3,500 small boats arrivals already this year because the Tories lost control of the borders, the NHS struggling to see people because the Tories broke it, millions paying more on their mortgages, a budget that hit pensioners, a £46 billion hole in his sums.“Why is the prime minister so scared to call an election?” More

  • in

    Jeremy Hunt tells Brexiteer inventor Sir James Dyson to ‘stand for election’ in fiery exchange

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailJeremy Hunt has been involved in a furious row with billionaire inventor James Dyson in a tense meeting about research and development, it has been reported.Mr Hunt is understood to have told Sir James Dyson – inventor of the Dyson vacuum cleaner – “If you think you could do a better job, why don’t you just stand for election?” in what has been described as a “fiery” exchange by insiders. Sir James met Mr Hunt to discuss tax relief after the business mogul made a series of public remarks about the government’s approach to entrepreneurship, according to the Financial Times.Sir James Dyson has been a vocal critic of the government’s approach to business One person familiar with the meeting between the chancellor and the entrepreneur told the FT it was “fiery”, while another said: “It was an awful meeting.” However, a Treasury insider is alleged to have disputed the description of the encounter, describing it as a “good, robust discussion”. The outspoken Brexiteer has been highly critical of Rishi Sunak’s approach to government as the prime minister has attempted to reconfigure the UK as a leading power in science and innovation and pitch London as the new “Silicon Valley”. Though the Conservatives had once been seen as the definitive party of business, Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have been courting business by meeting corporate leaders across the country.According to one Whitehall insider, Sir James has been forthright with the government about views on their economic policies. The source said: “He keeps sending quite aggressive letters. He’s quite forthright in his views, both publicly and privately”. Writing in the Times last year, Sir James said that ministers “talk hubristically” about making Britain a science and tech “superpower”, while overseeing “woeful policies”. The billionaire inventor – who relocated to Singapore before returning to the UK in 2019 – warned he is investing in “forward-looking economies” that encourage “growth and innovation” and hit out at “rocketing corporation tax” and “damaging legislation on working from home.” Chancellor Jeremy Hunt had a tense exchange with the billionaire Brexiteer He has also praised the tax-cutting policies of former chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng and Liz Truss, telling the Telegraph: “I thought they were doing the right thing – I’m the only one who did”. Mr Kwarteng’s 2022 mini-Budget triggered turmoil in the UK economic markets by promising unfunded tax cuts while former prime minister Liz Truss was forced from office not long after.A Treasury spokesperson refused to comment on the meeting while a Dyson spokesperson said: “We never comment about private meetings.” More

  • in

    Post Office manager who helped convict sub-postmasters is now handling compensation claims

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailA Post Office manager who helped to wrongfully convict a sub-postmistress during the Horizon scandal is handling victims’ compensation claims.Caroline Richards – who has worked for the Post Office for over 30 years – is reported to have played a key role in the wrongful prosecution of former sub-postmistress Jacqueline McDonald, who was sentenced to 18 months in prison after she was convicted of stealing almost £100,000 from her branch in Lancashire.Her conviction was overturned in 2021.Ms Richards now works as a “senior dispute resolution manager” on the Horizon Shortfall Scheme since 2021, assisting with reviewing cases against the Post Office, according to the i newspaper. The job description for the role states that all cases will be “investigated or reviewed fairly and impartially”.Post Office minister Kevin Hollinrake has introduced legislation to overturn the wrongful conviction of hundreds of sub-postmasters According to a court report in the Lancashire Evening Post and Ms McDonald’s witness statement handed over to the Horizon IT inquiry, Ms Richards initiated an investigation into Ms McDonald after discovering a mismatch between the amount of cash declared and the amount of cash being held in her safe.Campaigners and MPs told the i that the revelations are “outrageous”. Kevan Jones MP, who has campaigned on behalf of Horizon victims, said it shows the Post Office “just don’t get the sensitivity of these cases” and called for the compensation process to be made completely independent.In January, the inquiry was told that a former assistant at Ms McDonald’s branch wrote a letter of complaint to the Post Office about Ms Richards and investigator Stephen Bradshaw.Katie Noblet complained about “the unprofessional, disgusting behaviour and actions” of the pair and said that they came to her place of work in 2009 and that Mr Bradshaw was “very confrontational” and said she couldn’t have legal advice which was a “complete lie”. There is no suggestion Ms Richards knew the Horizon IT system was faulty at the time of the investigations.An online public petition with over 50,000 signatures has called on the Post Office to axe Ms Richards from the compensation scheme.Petitioner David Innes called her appointment an “insult to all of the 550 Post Office staff who were wrongfully prosecuted, including all those still awaiting compensation.” Former Post Office chairman Henry Staunton said postmasters felt there was a ‘complete lack of respect’ Labour MP Mr Jones told i  that the appointment of Ms Richards to a job in the compensation scheme is “outrageous”.“You couldn’t make it up. It shows the Post Office just don’t get it, especially the sensitivity of these cases” he added.Earlier this year, former Post Office chairman Henry Staunton wrote in an email that two former postmasters who sat on the board as non-executive directors, Saf Ismail and Elliot Jacobs, felt there was a “complete lack of respect for [postmasters]” and that the culture was “toxic”.Chief executive Nick Read has admitted the Post Office is investigating more than 40 cases of alleged inappropriate behaviour by existing employees relating to the Horizon scandal.A Post Office spokesperson said: “Claims in the Horizon Shortfall Scheme are assessed by an independent advisory panel of external experts. There is a full governance process for each and every claim. Our sole aim is that every Postmaster affected by the scandal receives full and fair redress as swiftly as possible.” More

  • in

    Children should not be taught about changing gender, says former Tory education minister

    A Conservative MP has said she does not want primary school children to be taught sex education or changing gender in a bid to “protect their innocence”.Andrea Jenkyns, who was education minister under Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, said she does not want young children to “learn about sex full stop”.Addressing MPs on Monday (18 March), Ms Jenkyns said: “As a mother myself of a child of primary school age, I do not want him or other children to learn about sex full stop, whether that’s straight or gay. “I also do not want to see young children at primary school to be taught about changing gender.” More

  • in

    Election misinformation is a problem in any language. But some gets more attention than others

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster email Warnings about deepfakes and disinformation fueled by artificial intelligence. Concerns about campaigns and candidates using social media to spread lies about elections. Fears that tech companies will fail to address these issues as their platforms are used to undermine democracy ahead of pivotal elections.Those are the worries facing elections in the U.S., where most voters speak English. But for languages like Spanish, or in dozens of nations where English isn’t the dominant language, there are even fewer safeguards in place to protect voters and democracy against the corrosive effects of election misinformation. It’s a problem getting renewed attention in an election year in which more people than ever will go to the polls.Tech companies have faced intense political pressure in countries like the U.S. and places like the European Union to show they’re serious about tackling the baseless claims, hate speech and authoritarian propaganda that pollutes their sites. But critics say they’ve been less responsive to similar concerns from smaller countries or from voters who speak other languages, reflecting a longtime bias toward English, the U.S. and other western democracies.Recent changes at tech firms — content moderator layoffs and decisions to rollback some misinformation policies — have only compounded the situation, even as new technologies like artificial intelligence make it easier than ever to craft lifelike audio and video that can fool voters. These gaps have opened up opportunities for candidates, political parties or foreign adversaries looking to create electoral chaos by targeting non-English speakers — whether they are Latinos in the U.S., or one of the millions of voters in India, for instance, who speak a non-English language.“If there’s a significant population that speaks another language, you can bet there’s going to be disinformation targeting them,” said Randy Abreu, an attorney at the U.S.-based National Hispanic Media Council, which created the Spanish Language Disinformation Coalition to track and identify disinformation targeting Latino voters in the U.S. “The power of artificial intelligence is now making this an even more frightening reality.”Many of the big tech companies regularly tout their efforts to safeguard elections, and not just in the U.S. and E.U. This month Meta is launching a service on WhatsApp that will allow users to flag possible AI deepfakes for action by fact-checkers. The service will work in four languages — English, Hindi, Tamil and Telugu.Meta says it has teams monitoring for misinformation in dozens of languages, and the company has announced other election-year policies for AI that will apply globally, including required labels for deepfakes as well as labels for political ads created using AI. But those rules have not taken effect and the company hasn’t said when they will begin enforcement.The laws governing social media platforms vary by nation, and critics of tech companies say they have been faster to address concerns about misinformation in the U.S. and the E.U., which has recently enacted new lawsdesigned to address the problem. Other nations all-too often get a “cookie cutter” response from tech companies that falls short, according to an analysis published this month by the Mozilla Foundation.The study looked at 200 different policy announcements from Meta, TikTok, X and Google (the owner of YouTube) and found that nearly two-thirds were focused on the U.S. or E.U. Actions in those jurisdictions were also more likely to involve meaningful investments of staff and resources, the foundation found, while new policies in other nations were more likely to rely on partnerships with fact-checking organizations and media literacy campaigns.Odanga Madung, a Nairobi, Kenya-based researcher who conducted Mozilla’s study, said it became clear that the platforms’ focus on the U.S. and E.U. comes at the expense of the rest of the world.“It’s a glaring travesty that platforms blatantly favor the U.S. and Europe with excessive policy coddling and protections, while systematically neglecting” other regions, Madung said.This lack of focus on other regions and languages will increase the risk that election misinformation could mislead voters and impact the results of elections. Around the globe, the claims are already circulating.Within the U.S., voters whose primary language is something other than English are already facing a wave of misleading and baseless claims, Abreau said. Claims targeting Spanish speakers, for instance, include posts that overstate the extent of voter fraud or contain false information about casting a ballot or registering to vote.Disinformation about elections has surged in Africa ahead of recent elections, according to a study this month from the Africa Center for Strategic Studies which identified dozens of recent disinformation campaigns — a four-fold increase from 2022. The false claims included baseless allegations about candidates, false information about voting and narratives that seem designed to undermine support for the United States and United Nations.The center determined that some of the campaigns were mounted by groups allied with the Kremlin, while others were spearheaded by domestic political groups.India, the world’s largest democracy, boasts more than a dozen languages each with more than 10 million native speakers. It also has more than 300 million Facebook users and nearly half a billion WhatsApp users, the most of any nation.Fact-checking organizations have emerged as the front line of defense against viral misinformation about elections. The country will hold elections later this spring and already voters going online to find out about the candidates and issues are awash in false and misleading claims.Among the latest: video of a politician’s speech that was carefully edited to remove key lines; years-old photos of political rallies passed off as new; and a fake election calendar that provided the wrong dates for voting. A lack of significant steps by tech companies has forced groups that advocate for voters and free elections to band together, said Ritu Kapur, co-founder and managing director of The Quint, an online publication that recently joined with several other outlets and Google to create a new fact-checking effort known as Shakti.“Mis- and disinformation is proliferating at an alarming pace, aided by technology and fueled and funded by those who stand to gain by it,” Kapur said. “The only way to combat the malaise is to join forces.” More

  • in

    Asylum chaos as RAF sites and Bibby Stockholm barge to cost more than hotels

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailThe spiralling costs of Rishi Sunak’s controversial plans to house asylum seekers on RAF sites and in a “prison-like” barge have been laid bare in a damning report that found that the scheme will be significantly more expensive than paying for hotels – despite the sites housing far fewer migrants than planned.The Home Office initially said that developing the four sites – including the Bibby Stockholm barge, two RAF sites, and former student accommodation in Huddersfield – would save taxpayers £94m.But Whitehall’s official watchdog says the prime minister’s plan is expected to cost £46m more than the current system – which sees migrants put up in hotels while their claims are being processed – and £1.2bn overall over the next decade.The National Audit Office (NAO) said the Home Office will have spent at least £230m developing the four major projects by the end of March – despite just two of the sites being open and providing accommodation for only 900 people.The damning report, published on Wednesday, follows a warning last week from former home secretary Dame Priti Patel that the government’s asylum accommodation system is in need of reform and that there are “serious questions” to be asked of her former department.The Bibby Stockholm barge is one of the two sites that are able to house asylum seekers at presentThe review said the government had spent more money unnecessarily and increased risk by pushing the projects forward too quickly, adding that the Home Office had pursued the policy despite “repeated” assessments that it “could not be delivered as planned”.Labour said the NAO’s findings were “staggering”, accusing the prime minister of “taking the Tories’ chaos and failure in the asylum system to a new level”.Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper added: “On top of the £8m a day on hotel rooms, the government is now paying tens of millions of pounds in set-up costs for new sites in Wethersfield and Scampton, which are still not in use, and millions more for sites that will never be used.”Charities said the report exposed “bad policies being implemented badly at huge financial cost”, and claimed that the accommodation sites were creating additional “fear and trauma” for asylum seekers.NAO boss Gareth Davies said: “The pace at which the government pursued its plans led to increased risks, and it now expects large sites to cost more than using hotel accommodation.”According to the findings, the Home Office originally estimated that the set-up costs at the former RAF bases would be £5m each, but they increased to £49m for Wethersfield and £27m for Scampton.So far only Wethersfield – which has a capacity of 1,700 – and the Bibby Stockholm, which has space for around 500 men, are housing asylum seekers.But the two sites were housing just under half the number of migrants the Home Office expected them to accommodate at the end of January, with 576 living at Wethersfield and 321 on the Bibby Stockholm at that point.An aerial view of the asylum accommodation centre at MDP Wethersfield in Essex, a 335-hectare airfield owned by the Ministry of Defence, where the Home Office has begun to house adult male migrantsThe government is currently facing legal action over the conditions at Wethersfield, which has been condemned as a de facto detention centre and not suitable for long-term accommodation. The Independent has previously revealed that nearly 100 asylum seekers, including suspected victims of torture and human trafficking, were moved out of the RAF base after the Home Office admitted the accommodation was unsuitable for them. According to the NAO report, the Home Office is “now considering reducing the maximum number of people it accommodates” at Wethersfield, but has not confirmed the new number.The department expects Scampton to start housing asylum seekers from April, with Huddersfield following in May, it added.The NAO also found that:The Home Office rated its own performance as “red” as it recognised the challenges of the work, repeatedly revising accommodation targets “downwards”The department “prioritised awarding contracts quickly, and modifying existing contracts over fully competitive tenders”, with “overly ambitious accommodation timetables” leading to “increased procurement risks”Emergency planning rules were used so that sites could be found, and so that work could begin quickly before speaking to affected communities about the plans, in order to “reduce the risk of local opposition affecting negotiations”. In January, the Home Office was “still working with providers to develop specific measures assessing residents’ safety at large sites”The Home Office is “resetting” its programme and developing a “longer-term accommodation strategy”, which will see it reduce the number of spaces it intends to provide at such sites amid proposals to “identify smaller sites accommodating between 200-700 people”There are “uncertainties” about how the Illegal Migration Act is being implemented, making it harder for the Home Office to assess what asylum accommodation it needs. The report said the law changes will make it “more difficult to assess how much and what type of accommodation the Home Office will need” as it does not know how effective the deterrent will be or how it will affect the amount and type of accommodation requiredThe costs for Wethersfield, the Bibby Stockholm and Scampton are £777.2m for 2023-2027. Costs for a new site at Huddersfield are £358.4m for the period until 2033 – taking the total costs in the next decade up to £1.2bn. On Monday, it emerged that Home Office minister Tom Pursglove had confirmed in a letter to Gainsborough Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh that the “regular occupancy” at RAF Scampton would be a maximum of 800 asylum seekers instead of the original 2,000 men destined for the site, which has been beset by legal challenges.Ms Cooper said: “This report is staggering. The British taxpayer is already paying out eye-watering sums on asylum hotels, and now it turns out the sites they promised would save money are costing the taxpayer even more. Rishi Sunak has taken the Tories’ chaos and failure in the asylum system to a new level.”Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper says Rishi Sunak’s plan has ‘failed on every level’ Refugee Council chief executive Enver Solomon said: “There would be no need to spend exorbitant sums of money on housing people in barges, military bases or hotels if cases were dealt with in a timely manner.”A Home Office spokesperson said that the use of asylum hotels is “unacceptable”, adding that the department had acted to “reduce the impact on local communities by moving asylum seekers onto barges and former military sites”. They added: “The cost of hotels will fall – and we are now closing dozens of asylum hotels every month to return them to communities … While the NAO’s figures include set-up costs, it is currently better value for money for the taxpayer to continue with these sites than to use hotels.” More