More stories

  • in

    Lord Cameron warns of ‘arms embargo’ to Israel as international pressure mounts

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailThe UK government has warned Israel that it could withhold weapons if the Red Cross is not given access to imprisoned Hamas fighters, according to Israeli media.Foreign secretary Lord Cameron is said to have warned Israeli officials that an “arms embargo” could be declared in Europe if Israel continue to withhold access to prisoners, according to the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper on Thursday.The caution follows reports that the UK government was considering withholding arms if Israel invaded the Gazan city of Rafah, after Lord Cameron wrote to parliament’s foreign affairs select committee saying that he could not see how an offensive in Rafah could go ahead without harming civilians and destroying homes.The former prime minister expressed his “deep concern” about the prospect of an offensive.“We do not underestimate the devastating humanitarian impacts that a full ground offensive, if enacted, would have in these circumstances,” he said.He added: “We continue to urge Israel to ensure that it limits its operations to military targets and take all possible steps to avoid harming civilians and destroying homes.”British officials have now reportedly demanded that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) be allowed to visit Hamas prisoners in Israel to ensure adherence to international law. The Foreign Secretary said Israel had an ‘obligation to ensure significantly more humanitarian aid reached the people of Gaza’Yedioth Ahronoth also reported that British lawyers visited Israel to examine the issue and issued advice that all prisoners in Israel, including the Hamas suspects, should be allowed a visit by the Red Cross.Chair of the foreign affairs committee Alicia Kearns told LBC she expected the government to publish a decision on whether or not Israel is still upholding international law and whether it would continue to provide weapons “within the week”.She said: “I pushed the government last week and again this week on whether or not our assessment has changed or whether or not international law is being upheld by Israel. And the answer was that we are currently undertaking the assessment and we will go back to the house shortly.”She added: “If we don’t hear that within the week, I would be very surprised.”Lord Cameron’s alleged challenge to the Israeli government comes amid mounting pressure on Western nations to prevent the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. Canada’s house of commons moved to halt future arms sales to Israel following a non-binding vote earlier in the week.Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has warned Israel it had a legal responsibility to address the “urgent and monumental” humanitarian needs of Palestinians in Gaza.The Most Rev Justin Welby said international law called for the “rapid and unimpeded” passage of humanitarian relief for civilians but he accused the Israeli government of preventing access.The archbishop warned that if nothing changes then “famine is imminent”, with children already dying from starvation and dehydration.He said: “Israel’s prosecution of this war has destroyed large parts of the Gaza Strip – decimating infrastructure essential to human survival.”The UK will not disclose the arms export licences granted to Israel in the final quarter of last year until later this year. In 2022 the UK granted export licences to Israel worth £42m. A FCDO spokesperson said: “We keep advice on Israel’s adherence to International Humanitarian Law under review and will act in accordance with that advice.“All export licence applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis against the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria.” More

  • in

    Voices: Better charging, cheaper electricity and bigger range – readers on what would convince them to buy an EV

    Sign up to the Independent Climate email for the latest advice on saving the planetGet our free Climate emailAs Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s recent budget came under fire for its failure to provide significant incentives to boost EV sales, we asked Independent readers what would encourage them to switch from a petrol car to electric.Mr Hunt’s spring Budget did not include sweeteners for private EV buyers, such as a halving VAT on new EVs and a reduction in VAT on public charging, despite industry calls.Manufacturers have expressed concern that the absence of such incentives could hinder their ability to meet the stringent targets outlined in the Government’s zero emission vehicle mandate. From a more robust charging network to batteries with bigger ranges and cheaper electricity rates for charging in public, readers had several thoughts on making EV ownership more attractive.Here’s what you had to say:‘Manufacturers need to make vehicles that match the present usability’If a product needs Government (ie taxpayer) paid for incentives to get people to buy it then it doesn’t say much for the economics of making the product. If I bought a new electric version of my existing hatchback it would cost £10000 more than the equivalent new petrol version, cost more to run due to the present higher cost of electricity, have a much shorter range and take far longer to “refuel” (recharge). Manufacturers need to produce vehicles that match the usability of present vehicles and are a similar cost to run, then market forces will lead to the adoption of this new technology.Halcyon‘It’s been great to use’We replaced our 20-year-old petrol car with an EV, when it became too expensive to get repaired.It’s been great to use, but we can charge at home, which we do 95% of the time.I’ve driven it to Cardiff and back without delay, topping up just (every time) whilst I make a “comfort break”. Leaving it until the tank is nearly empty only makes sense with petrol or dieselJohnG‘Cheaper electricity would be welcome’‘EV only’ markings in the space next to the charging lampposts, as I don’t have a driveway with my own charger and trying to find a lamppost to charge at that doesn’t have a petrol or diesel car parked next to it is incredibly difficult. Cheaper electricity would be welcome too as I have no way of creating my own electricity.Maybe it’s just my manor, Tower Hamlets, but there is a severe lack of fast chargers, so it’s a double whammy! Other than that EVs are great!!GrumpyG‘No need to accept a degraded experience’I would only consider buying an EV if I can replicate what I can do now, including the cost of a replacement vehicle. I can drive from London to Manchester, and back, on just 6 gallons of diesel without the need to stop to fill up (400 miles). When I do fill up it takes no more than 3 minutes and I can always do so without having to wait for a pump to be free which are ubiquitous and available at short distances between each other. To accept anything less convenient or affordable would require me to change how I travel and I won’t agree to that as there is no need to accept that a degraded experience is required.AVoter‘Make electric cars better’Yes. Make electric cars a lot better than they are now. That’s the incentive. Don’t bribe me by taking money away from hospitals saying you’ll give it to me if I make an inferior choice.TheRedSquirrel‘The car industry is pushing EVs to save the car industry, not the planet’Electric cars still have poor and temperature-variable battery capacity; batteries decay in efficiency in a way that petrol and diesel engines simply don’t do; the charging infrastructure is woefully inadequate here, both in capacity and charging speed – I refuse to wait 45 minutes+ drinking over-priced ash-tasting coffee in a bleak and dirty Wild Bean Café. And should you be involved in a serious collision on your way to a frequent and stressful recharge, an EV fire is next to impossible to easily put out.Also range anxiety is still a thing, and there have been enough software problems to cause alarm too. And what happens to the old and spent batteries when the first wave of EV batteries dies? We don’t really know. What’s the environmental cost of ramping up battery production? We really don’t know.And finally, EVs have terrible depreciation and awful resale values. And surely it’d be better for the environment for me to keep my existing well-serviced and efficient five-year-old petrol car that I drive once a month or so, than to scrap it and get an EV?The car industry is pushing EVs to save the car industry, not the planet. If EVs do get subsidised, that’ll help virtue-signalling urbanites and no-one else.IntactilisSome of the comments have been edited for this article. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article.The conversation isn’t over – there’s still time to have your say. If you want to share your opinion then add it in the comments of this story.All you have to do is sign up, submit your question and register your details – then you can then take part in the discussion. You can also sign up by clicking ‘log in’ on the top right-hand corner of the screen.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

  • in

    Angela Rayner says questions about her tax affairs are ‘a smear’

    Angela Rayner has said she is the victim of a “non-story manufactured to try and smear”her over the sale of her council tax home.The Labour deputy leader was criticised for turning a £48,500 profit on the property in Stockport, Greater Manchester, which she bought in 2007 with a 25 per cent discount.Speaking in her first TV interview since claims emerged that she may have owed capital gains tax on the 2015 sale, Ms Rayner told BBC Newsnight: “I’ve been very clear there was no rules broken. They [the Conservatives] tried to manufacture a police investigation.” More

  • in

    Bid to create AI Authority amid pleas for swifter action from UK Government

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailBritain risks “sliding into global irrelevance” on artificial intelligence (AI) if the Government does not introduce new laws to regulate the sector, according to a Conservative peer.A new body, known as the AI Authority, would be established under a proposal tabled in Parliament by Lord Holmes of Richmond.His Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill, to be debated at second reading on Friday, would require the authority to push forward AI regulation in the UK and assess and monitor potential risks to the economy.We need leadership, right-sized regulation, right nowLord Holmes of RichmondSecurity, fairness, accountability and transparency are among the principles that the AI Authority must take into consideration, according to the Bill.The Government believes a non-statutory approach provides “critical adaptability” but has pledged to keep it under review.Lord Holmes said: “The current Government approach risks the UK sliding into global irrelevance on this hugely important issue of protecting citizen rights and ensuring AI is developed and deployed in a humanity-enhancing, rather than a society-destroying, way.“The Government claims that their light-touch approach is ‘pro-innovation’ but innovation is not aided by uncertainty and instability.“AI offers some of the greatest opportunities for our economy, our society, our human selves.“It also, if unregulated holds obvious existential harms. Self-governance and voluntary agreements just don’t cut it.“We need leadership, right-sized regulation, right now.“The UK can, the UK must lead when it comes to ethical AI.“This Bill offers them that very opportunity. I hope they take it.”The Bill would also seek to ensure any person involved in training AI would have to supply to the authority a record of all third-party data and intellectual property (IP) they used and offer assurances that informed consent was secured for its use.Lord Holmes added on the labelling system: “People would know if a service or a good had used or deployed AI in the provision of that service.”Speaking in November last year, Rishi Sunak said Britain’s AI safety summit would “tip the balance in favour of humanity” after reaching an agreement with technology firms to vet their models before their release.The Prime Minister said “binding requirements” would likely to be needed to regulate the technology, but now is the time to move quickly without laws.Elon Musk, the owner of social media platform X, described AI as “one of the biggest threats” facing humanity.The Government announced in February that more than £100 million will be spent preparing the UK to regulate AI and use the technology safely, including helping to prepare and upskill regulators across different sectors.Minister have chosen to use existing regulators to take on the role of monitoring AI use within their own sectors rather than creating a new, central regulator dedicated to the emerging technology.A Government spokesman said: “As is standard process, the Government’s position on this Bill will be confirmed during the debate.” More

  • in

    Minister for ‘common sense’ claims thousands in rent – despite MP husband owning flat nearby

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailA government minister tasked with identifying wasteful spending has been charging the taxpayer tens of thousands of pounds in expenses to rent a flat in London despite her fellow MP husband owning a property nearby.Esther McVey has over the past two years received more than £30,000  in taxpayers’ money to rent the flat where she lives with her husband Phillip Davies, the MP for Shipley.Ms McVey, who represents Tatton and was last year appointed minister for ‘common sense’, is paid £86,584 for being an MP but will be earning thousands of pounds more from her additional role as Cabinet Office minister without portfolio.She and her husband have been claiming expenses on a property in Westminster since 2017, according to The Daily Telegraph and campaign group Led By Donkeys.Esther McVey, the so-called minister for common sense, has criticised wasteful government spending According to the report, Mr Davies owns a property in Waterloo, which is about a 25-minute walk away. The property is rented out and the MP  has declared an annual income of more than £10,000 from this property.Mr Davies, who has also earned thousands of pounds from media work over the past two years, said he would have been happy to continue claiming mortgage costs on the flat he owns, “but that option was removed from me”.MPs can no longer claim their mortgage payments back from the taxpayer following changes to the rules in the aftermath of the 2009 expenses scandal.The couple is not breaking any rules but their arrangement raises questions about value for money, particularly given Ms McVey’s role at the top of government in charge of tacking wasteful spending.Ms McVey’s husband is Philip Davies MPMs McVey, a self-declared low-tax Thatcherite who often rails against the ‘big state’, wrote in the Daily Mail last year that she did not “want you to see a single penny of your hard-earned cash wasted on unnecessary public spending”.Her duties as Cabinet Office minister without portfolio include delivery of government priorities and ensuring effective communication of Downing Street’s objectives.Ms McVey, who previously served as secretary of state for work and pensions from January to November 2018, also earned thousands of pounds for media work.In February she told GB News she had written to independent government agencies asking them to spend more efficiently.“We want to make sure there isn’t any waste … You can’t put up taxpayers’ bills and ask the government for more money, and yet not get rid of wasteful spending yourself,” she said.Mr Davies told Led By Donkeys: “If I owned the flat outright and I could stay there without incurring any cost then I would agree that I should do that, but that doesn’t remotely apply in my case.“As far as I am aware, all workplaces cover the accommodation costs of people working away from home, and I am surprised … [you] … think that should no longer be the case. That, of course, will lead to only the wealthiest people in the country being able to become MPs.”Ms McVey has been contacted for comment. More

  • in

    Moment youngest life peer takes seat in House of Lords at 28 years old

    The youngest ever life peer has taken her seat in the House of Lords, which she wants to abolish.Plaid Cymru’s Carmen Smith, 28, will go by the title Baroness Smith of Llanfaes.She has succeeded as the youngest ever life peer Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge, who was made a life peer in July 2023 at the age of 30.The average age in the unelected chamber is 71.Wearing a a fake fur robe, rather than a traditional ermine one, she swore the oath of allegiance to King Charles III in both English and Welsh. More

  • in

    Cheese-inspired fever dreams fuelling Labour claims about Budget, according to Penny Mordaunt

    The House of Commons erupted in laughter as Penny Mordaunt suggested that Labour’s claims about Jeremy Hunt’s ambition to abolish national insurance were fuelled by dreams “after eating a large amount of cheese.”Opposition MPs pressed the Commons Leader to explain if the “unfunded commitment of £46bn” would be paid for by tax rises for pensioners, cuts to the NHS, or an increase in Government debt.“I suspect the event the honourable gentleman might be recalling was actually a dream, perhaps after eating a large amount of cheese,” Ms Mordaunt said. More

  • in

    Lords’ further defeat of Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill delays final vote past Easter

    Get the free Morning Headlines email for news from our reporters across the worldSign up to our free Morning Headlines emailPeers have inflicted a further series of defeats on Rishi Sunak’s flagship small boats bill, which would see asylum seekers deported to Rwanda. The House of Lords voted on Wednesday night that the government’s bill should have “due regard” for international law, and that the UK’s treaty with Rwanda should be fully implemented before flights start. Peers defeated the government on all seven votes, including passing an amendment that would exempt Afghan heroes who supported British troops from deportation to Rwanda. Labour’s Vernon Coaker told peers that the reputation of the country was at stake, stressing that it “can’t be right” that the fundamental bill exempts ministers from following international law. Lord Coaker also berated the Tory peers for failing to update the house about when the bill would return to the Lords for further debate – with peers now believing it will not return until after Easter. This delay will push back the dates that flights will inevitably be able to take off to Rwanda. Alex Carlile, a cross-bench peer, compared the mounting costs of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda to staying at The Ritz in Paris and added: “We’re a very long way from being satisfied that Rwanda is a safe country.”Rishi Sunak was told it was a ‘moral imperative’ that Afghan heroes who supported British troops should not be deported to Rwanda Government law officer Lord Stewart of Dirleton has argued criticism of the Tory administration over the Rwanda bill was “fundamentally misconceived”.He said: “We cannot allow people to make such dangerous crossings and we must do what we can to prevent any more lives from being lost at sea.”Ken Clarke, Tory peer and former chancellor, was the sole Conservative peer to rebel against his government in the votes two and three, which were for comparatively small changes to the bill that would force the greater scrutiny of Rwanda’s preparations ahead of flights.Peers also voted in favour of a Labour backbench amendment from Baroness Lister of Burtersett to require age assessments for those facing removal to Rwanda to be conducted by local authorities. They also voted in favour of restoring the jurisdiction of the domestic courts over the bill. In response to an amendment that aims to safeguard Afghan heroes who helped the UK, the government told peers on Wednesday evening that they would consider exempting members of the Afghan special forces from deportation from the UK. The Independent first revealed that members of the Afghan special forces, known as the Triples, who fought alongside British troops had been wrongly denied help by the Ministry of Defence. A review is currently being undertaken into the relocation decisions made for this cohort, a handful of whom have made it to the UK via small boat. While the Illegal Migration Act compels ministers to remove those who have arrived to the UK on a small boat from the country, Tory peers told the Lords that certain groups can be exempted from the affects of the act. This will be of comfort to those Afghan special forces who are deemed eligible under the Ministry of Defence’s new review of relocation decisions, however there is still a fear that those who supported UK troops could again be found ineligible for help. Labour’s Des Browne put forward an amendment to the Rwanda bill to exempt Afghans who worked alongside British troops Des Browne, who put forward the armed forces amendment, told the Lords: “We are told that many, who have braved death, injury and are forced into exile as a result of assisting our armed forces in fighting the Taliban, are to be punished for arriving here by irregular routes.“Even when owing to wrongful refusals on our part or possible malfeasance on the part of the special forces, that compelled them to take these routes in the first place.”Lord Browne said there were a number of Afghans in Afghanistan and Pakistan waiting on review decisions, but “a much smaller number, which the amendment seeks to protect, who are already here”. He continued: “They were compelled to seek irregular routes, or face certain death or torture. “For the last year The Independent, Lighthouse Reports and Sky, have been exposing cases where owing to [government] errors and alleged interference by UK special forces, Afghans who served alongside either with the Triples, or otherwise alongside our armed forces, wrongly were denied the ability to relocate and were forced to arrive here by other means.”Lord Browne said the government should not make promises about future exemptions but rather pass the amendment in front of them that would achieve similar aims. He questioned whether Afghans who had been failed by the Ministry of Defence could trust “the same people who wrongly refused their relocation visas in the first place”. This amendment was passed by the Lords with a majority of 39. MPs on Monday night overturned all 10 amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, including an attempt by peers to prevent age-disputed children from being sent to Rwanda. The Home Office has already identified 150 migrants for the first two deportation flights. The bill will now return to the House of Commons for further scrutiny from MPs. More