Home News

Prince Charles privately described the government’s policy of sending migrants to Rwanda as “appalling”, according to reports.The heir to the throne is said to be particularly uncomfortable with the scheme as he believes the widely criticised policy will overshadow his upcoming visit to the country, where he will represent the Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit.Charles was heard expressing opposition to home secretary Priti Patel’s plans several times in private, and was “more than disappointed”, a source told The Times and the Daily Mail.”He said he thinks the government’s whole approach is appalling. It was clear he was not impressed with the government’s direction of travel,” the Times reported.Clarence House did not deny this was the case, but said Charles would never seek to influence the running of government.A spokesperson said: “We would not comment on supposed anonymous private conversations with the Prince of Wales, except to restate that he remains politically neutral. Matters of policy are decisions for government.”The Prince of Wales’ alleged comments came as the High Court blocked a bid to stop the first flight of migrants to Rwanda.Up to 130 people had been notified they could be removed, with 31 people due on Tuesday’s flight.Lawyers for almost 100 migrants had submitted legal challenges asking to stay in the UK with the remaining anticipated to follow suit.But the High Court rejected campaigners’ bid for an injunction to stop the deportation flight,Ms Patel welcomed the ruling, saying the government will “now continue to deliver on progressing our world-leading migration partnership”.“People will continue to try and prevent their relocation through legal challenges and last-minute claims, but we will not be deterred in breaking the deadly people smuggling trade and ultimately saving lives,” she said.“Rwanda is a safe country and has previously been recognised for providing a safe haven for refugees – we will continue preparations for the first flight to Rwanda, alongside the range of other measures intended to reduce small boat crossings.”Campaigners said they were “disappointed” and “deeply concerned” for the welfare of those due to be sent to Rwanda, but added that they would appeal against the decision in court on Monday. More

Home secretary Priti Patel’s highly-controversial plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda on a plane next week has been given the go-ahead, despite warnings by the UN’s refugee agency the scheme is unlawful. A High Court judge rejected campaigners’ bid for an injunction to stop the Home Office’s first deportation flight to Rwanda, scheduled to leave on Tuesday with 31 migrants onboard. Despite outrage from human rights groups and opposition MPs, up to 130 people have been notified that they could be sent to the central African nation for asylum “processing”, as the Home Office plans to schedule more flights this year.The Prince of Wales was reported as privately describing the government’s policy as “appalling”, with Charles said to have been especially frustrated at the policy as he will represent the Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Rwanda later this month.The Times and the Daily Mail each said a source had heard the heir to the throne express opposition to the policy several times in private, and that he was “more than disappointed”.Ms Patel welcomed Friday’s court ruling and insisted that she would “not be deterred” by any further attempts “prevent their relocation through legal challenges and last-minute claims” by activists.“Rwanda is a safe country,” said the home secretary. “We will continue preparations for the first flight to Rwanda, alongside the range of other measures intended to reduce small boat crossings.”Campaign groups said they were “disappointed” and “deeply concerned” at the verdict – but vowed to keep fighting the Rwanda plan. The decision will not stop individual refugees from making their own legal challenges against removal.Court documents revealed the Home Office cancelled deportations to Rwanda for five migrants who appealed. Lawyers for almost 100 migrants have submitted legal challenges asking to stay in the UK, with the remaining expected to follow suit.The court action was brought by lawyers on behalf of Care4Calais and Detention Action, and the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS), who challenged the legal principle of the policy.Rejecting the bid to block the flight, Judge Jonathan Swift said some of the risks facing the deported asylum seekers were small and “in the realms of speculation”. Mr Justice Swift said there was a “material public interest” in allowing the home secretary to implement immigration decisions.Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais responded: “Today was just the beginning of this legal challenge. We believe that the next stage of legal proceedings may bring an end to this utterly barbaric plan.”Mr Justice Swift did grant the groups permission to appeal Friday’s verdict, suggesting Court of Appeal judges would hear the case on Monday. The judge also said a full judicial hearing to decide on the scheme’s overall legality would take place before the end of July.Detention Action said: “Our appeal will be heard on Monday and our larger legal case against this policy will be heard over the coming weeks. Thanks to all those standing with us.” More

Jacob Rees-Mogg and Commons leader Mark Spencer have refused to take part in a public debate on why they “blocked” a bill that would have spared elephants from torture in Asia.The Brexit opportunities minister and Mr Spencer are widely thought to have vetoed planned legislation to ban UK adverts for foreign theme parks where elephants are stabbed, chained and deprived of sleep, food and water to make them comply with orders.The Animals Abroad Bill, previously agreed in cabinet, would have outlawed adverts by British holiday companies for attractions where the animals are forced on pain of punishment to give rides and perform “tricks” such as playing football and painting pictures.The bill, which would also have banned imports of foie gras, fur and hunting trophies, was dropped earlier this year because of opposition from ministers who deemed it “un-Conservative”.Activists from the Save the Asian Elephants organisation, who were furious at the measure being canned, wrote to the two senior MPs asking them to take part in a debate in their constituencies over the issue and also to go on a fact-finding mission to see how elephants are treated behind the scenes at tourist attractions.The government’s own Animal Welfare Action Plan, which ministers vaunted as groundbreaking when they launched it last year, included a promise to ban the adverts.The sister of a British woman killed by an elephant at one theme park told two months ago how she was disgusted the government had performed a U-turn on its plan.But the bill was dropped from the Queen’s speech at the reopening of parliament.Duncan McNair, chief executive of Save the Asian Elephants (StAE), who has previously had meetings in Downing Street to lobby for a ban, wrote to the two MPs: “This omission came as a shock not only to those engaged daily in working to protect the highly endangered species from brutality and extinction to whom government has repeatedly made such promises, but to the many tens of millions in the country which polling show to be strongly supportive of such a ban.”He said in Mr Rees-Mogg’s North East Somerset constituency, 87 per cent of voters supported the ban and 86 per cent in Mr Spencer’s Sherwood constituency.“Government has yet to explain why it has abandoned its promises of such a ban,” the letter added.“I invite you to debate the issues with me in a convenient large public space within your constituency to see what local people think having heard both sides…“We also invite you to join StAE for a fact-finding visit to SE Asia so you may see first-hand the brutality inflicted on Asian elephants and their babies in tourism at ‘attractions’ promoted by UK companies.”The office of Mr Rees-Mogg, a former Commons leader, did not respond to repeated requests by The Independent to comment on the invitations and to say whether he believes cruelty to elephants can be justified.But a brief reply from the Cabinet Office to Mr McNair said the MP could not agree to either request “due to diary pressures”.A source close to Mr Spencer told The Independent he would not take part in either a debate or visit to elephant attractions in Asia.The source said Mr Spencer would not comment on the letter or on why he opposed the bill.But they said the government was confident it would deliver all its manifesto commitments on animal welfare by the end of the parliament in 2024, as well as pledges in the animal welfare action plan – including banning adverts for low-welfare experiences.Mr McNair has asked Mr Rees-Mogg to write personally explaining his views. More

The Conservative candidate in the Tiverton and Honiton by-election has refused to say how she would have voted in Monday night’s confidence ballot on Boris Johnson had she been an MP, labelling the question “irrelevant”.Helen Hurford said she now backed the prime minister but, asked on Tuesday, if she would have voted to keep Mr Johnson in post, she declined to answer.“I’m not in Westminster,” she said. “I don’t have a vote. Thank you for asking. That would make me sound very important, but it’s irrelevant. It’s happened. He’s here.”The exchange came as the former headteacher battles to retain the rural Devon seat for the Conservatives after former MP Neil Parish resigned following an admission that he had twice watched pornography in the House of Commons.While on paper, the seat should be safely blue – the party has held the constituency since its creation in 1997 and won a 23,000 majority three years ago – the Lib Dems have been made favourites amid continuing anger with Mr Johnson over partygate.Speaking to Radio Exe, Ms Hurford said she had “welcomed” the confidence vote in which 211 Tory MPs voted to keep Mr Johnson as leader compared to 148 who wanted him out.But she said it was now time to “close” the issue.“There’s been a democratic vote, he has had a third mandate now, let’s move forward,” she said. “He’s done a brilliant job with Russia’s war against Ukraine. Putin hates him as prime minister because of how he’s delivering.“He has supported us over the pandemic. My business [ a beauty business in Hiniton] would not be here without the grants. I know loads of my friends who were supported with the furlough. They would not still have their homes if it hadn’t been for that.”Her refusal to clarify if she would have supported Mr Johnson comes after The Independent revealed that Tory strategists had spent much time agonising over how the candidate should answer questions about partygate – in which the prime minister presided over a culture of illegal lockdown parties in Downing Street.So imperfect was every response they workshopped that they decided to simply stop Ms Hurford doing almost any media appearances to prevent her from being scrutinised about the issue.Richard Foord, the Lib Dem candidate, said the Conservatives had taken the area “for granted for decades” and the party’s current infighting would mean further neglect.He said: “Local people are crying out for help but Boris Johnson simply isn’t listening. He’s more focused on trying to cling to power that helping struggling families.” More

Labour has warned of a “cost of living tsunami” as families face price rises of up to 50 per cent on everyday grocery items.Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that the cheapest pasta rose by 50 per cent in the 12 months to April, while the average price of bread, minced beef, rice and crisps increased by more than 15 per cent.Charities say the increase will see more of the poorest families turn to food banks as households struggle with the brunt of the cost of living crisis, which has driven up energy bills, rent prices and food costs.It comes after The Independent revealed how tens of thousands of Britain’s poorest families stand to miss out on help measures introduced by the chancellor Rishi Sunak thanks to the benefits cap.Jonathan Ashworth, shadow secretary of state for work and pensions, said: “Prices are soaring while struggling families are cutting back or even turning to food banks.“Tory MPs last month cut universal credit in real terms after slashing it by £20 a week last year. This is a cost of living tsunami caused by years of Tory economic mismanagement.”Sabine Goodwin, coordinator of the Independent Food Aid Network (IFAN), said: “Increasing staple food prices combined with rising costs in energy are inevitably going to put yet more pressure on low-income households and in turn increase the need for food banks“The chancellor’s cash-first interventions are very welcome but they don’t go far enough given the scale of the UK’s long-standing poverty crisis.”IFAN said 93 per cent of its food banks have reported an increase or significant increase in the need for their services since the start of 2022.As part of the ONS research, statisticians chose 30 low-cost groceries that are regularly purchased by households and tracked their prices from April 2021 to April 2022. During this period, average prices jumped by 6 to 7 per cent, running close to the inflation of overall food and alcohol prices.”For months we’ve heard that families on the lowest incomes have had to make tough choices when doing their weekly food shop, putting items back on the shelves and at the till when hit with rising prices,” said Alice Fuller, head of child poverty at Save the Children UK.“This new ONS analysis of 30 everyday grocery items confirms their experiences and shows the cost of living crisis has already had an impact on people’s finances and the way they eat … The price of a basket of shopping is adding to people’s woes.”Some everyday items tracked in the ONS analysis showed a drop in prices, including cheese, pizza, chips, sausages and apples. The cost of potatoes saw the most notable decrease, at 14 per cent.However, the research, which the ONS said was “highly experimental”, does not take into account the costs associated with buying a product. While potato prices have dropped significantly, many struggling households avoid them because they take longer to boil than alternatives and therefore use more gas or electricity. In March, the boss of Iceland said that some food bank users were turning down potatoes and other root vegetables because they could not afford to boil them.At the same time that staple grocery items have increased, food bank usage has also risen, according to the Trussell Trust.Between 1 April 2021 and 31 March 2022, food banks in the charity’s UK network distributed over 2.1 million emergency food parcels to people in crisis – a year-on-year increase of 14 per cent.Elizabeth Maytom, a project manager for Norwood-Brixton Food Bank, in south London, said local demand had particularly intensified in recent weeks, describing it as “unprecedented”.“We don’t have enough stock,” she said. “Even basics like pasta and baked beans, we’re asking the general public for, which we never used to do. We’re seeing lots of people needing help for the first time.”IFAN said more than 80 per cent of its 194 food banks reported that they have struggled with food supply issues over the last four months.Kathy Bland, an IFAN member of Leominster Food Bank, in Herefordshire, said their organisation gave out 179 food parcels in April 2022, compared to 86 in April 2021.“We can’t replace the welfare system, and neither should we,” she said. “Providing long-term support for people unable to afford food isn’t sustainable.”Separate data from The Food Foundation recently showed a 57 per cent increase in the proportion of households cutting back on food or missing meals altogether in just three months.In April, 7.3 million adults lived in households that said they had gone without food or could not physically get it in the past month. This is compared with 4.7 million adults in January.“There’s no doubt that the cost of living crisis is having a devastating impact on families’ ability to afford the food they need,” said Shona Goudie, policy research manager at The Food Foundation. “This is in part due to the large increase in food prices that we’re seeing, but also due to increases in prices of other essentials (such as energy bills) which is putting pressure on families’ disposable income and therefore squeezing their food budget.”After weeks of pressure, chancellor Rishi Sunak last week announced a £5bn windfall tax of 25 per cent on oil and gas companies to help fund a £15bn package of assistance for struggling households.Mr Sunak said that almost all of the 8 million worst-off households in the UK will benefit to the tune of £1,200, made up of support measures including a £650 cost of living payment for the poorest, a one-off £300 payment to 8 million pensioner households and £150 each to 6 million disabled people.He added that he will double the assistance with energy bills on offer to all households this autumn from £200 to £400 and convert the payment from a loan to a grant.However, while benefits payments are set to soar by as much as 10 per cent from April, more than 120,000 households will lose out unless ministers raise the cap on how much they can receive from the state. More

Cleaners delivered a stinging rebuke to Boris Johnson’s government at a Downing Street protest on Friday evening, accusing the cabinet of looking “down on us like we’re the dirt that we clean”.The protest was called after Sue Gray’s report into illegal parties at Downing Street found that No 10 staff had treated cleaning and security staff “unacceptably” on several occasions.Workers told The Independent that the problems with respect went beyond No 10 and raised issues relating to insecure, outsourced contracts and low pay. More

A former Labour minister has appeared to suggest that voters in the Tiverton and Honiton by-election should consider going Liberal Democrat in a bid to oust the Conservatives.Ben Bradshaw – who was culture secretary between 2009 and 2010 – said his party should fight for every vote in the seat. But, in what some will regard as a coded message, he added: “What some Labour members and activists don’t always appreciate is that a lot of Conservative voters, if they want to give the government a kicking will vote Liberal Democrat but they wouldn’t vote Labour…“So if we have a joint purpose of wanting to send the prime minister a message and ultimately defeat this government in a general election then I think there are very good prospects of a Lib Dem victory there.”The race for Tiverton and Honiton – a sprawling, largely rural Devon constituency – prompted by the resignation of Neil Parish who admitted watching porn in the House of Commons, is being widely touted as a two-horse race. The Tories currently enjoy a 24,239 majority and have held the seat since it was created in 1997 but the Lib Dems believe they could steal it on the back of anger about Partygate and rising living costs.Suggestions have been made that Labour will fight only a bare minimum campaign here to allow yellow candidate Richard Foord a clear run, with the Lib Dems returning the favour in Wakefield where another by-election is being held the same day.Both parties have denied such a pact.But Mr Bradshaw’s comments – initially made on Radio 4’s The Week In Westminster – will be seen as a tacit endorsement of voting tactically. More

The Conservative candidate for the upcoming Tiverton and Honiton by-election has been ordered not to speak to the media by senior party officials because they fear she will be asked about partygate, insiders say.Parish councillor Helen Hurford has been selected to fight the seat after former Tory MP Neil Parish resigned following revelations that he had twice watched pornography in parliament.But the former headteacher is said to have been told not to speak to press – because CCHQ think she will struggle to deal with questions about Boris Johnson’s lockdown lawbreaking.One local Tory says that anger about Downing Street shindogs is now so widespread in the rural Devon constituency that it has been decided Ms Hurford’s best chance of victory is to remain largely silent and hope the party’s current 24,000 majority carries her to victory.Strategists are said to have spent time workshopping a response to difficult questions but even the favoured option – to suggest the prime minister got things wrong but it is time to move on – is considered likely to antagonise voters in an area where integrity is expected to come as standard.The result is that Ms Hurford has been all but invisible since being selected as the Tories’ candidate on Monday. Requests to speak to her by The Independent went firstly unanswered and were then declined with no reason given.The order for silence is said to have even been extended to local Conservative councillors who have been informally told not to discuss the by-election with media.Asked in a WhatsApp message if such an instruction had been given, one councillor Colin Slade replied: “I couldn’t possibly comment!”Another, who asked not to be named, added that members had been told they should “button up”.Responding to the revelations, a source with the Lib Dems, who are considered the main challengers here, said: “It’s sad that Tory bosses have now effectively gagged their candidate. How can voters trust her to speak up for them if she isn’t even allowed to speak?”It all comes after Sir Roger Gale, the MP for North Thanet, said Ms Hurford had been chosen as a “electoral sacrifice” amid growing fears the Tories could lose the contest.“I asked in the tea room this morning if we had actually selected an electoral sacrifice to fight…and I’m told that we have,” he told BBC News on Wednesday.Yet how well the tactic of eschewing scrutiny will work is yet to be seen.A similar playbook was used in the Hartlepool, Batley and Spen and North Shropshire by-elections last year when Conservative candidates were labelled invisible for their lack of media engagement.While it worked in Hartlepool, it proved a disaster in Batley and Spen and North Shropshire where the Tories lost despite being favourites.The Conservatives have been approached for comment. More