Home News

After the vote and the count, the eternal existential question: what does it all mean anyway?Commentators have spent the last 36 hours wrestling with local election results that have, somehow, been a disaster for Boris Johnson without being much good for Sir Keir Starmer either.The facts are simple enough. The Tories lost almost 500 councillors, while Labour and the Lib Dems both made big gains: 261 and 189 respectively. The Greens won 82 and the Scottish National Party 61.Yet what exactly this tells us about the state of British public opinion – and how a general election might go – remains as contested as the campaigning itself.In the run up to voting day on Thursday, The Independent identified eight key council areas that may offer key clues to the direction of politics over the next two years. Now, we look at the results in those places and the lessons they (possibly) offer…Derby City CouncilWhen commentators suggest that Labour endured a difficult election despite picking up some 261 council seats, it is places like Derby they are thinking of.The city authority is historically red but has been led by a minority Tory administration since 2018 – a shift that preceded the fall of the Red Wall at the following year’s general election.If Labour is to triumph the next time the country goes to the polls, it is exactly such Midlands (and Northern) cities and towns they need to win back. Yet, despite picking up two seats in Derby on Thursday, they remain behind the Tories here with just 16 councillors compared to the blues’ 18.In a swathe of other former heartland areas – including Bolton, Dudley and Walsall – the same thing happened. Modest gains were overshadowed by the fact the Tories remained the larget party. In several areas, Labour lost seats: Newcastle-under-Lyme, Barnsley and South Shields among them.The conclusion? It may be some time yet before the Red Wall reverts back to Labour. More

Dozens of the UK’s leading animal charities have written to Boris Johnson asking him to include in the Queen’s speech an earlier promise to ban imports of hunting trophies, fur, foie gras and shark fins.The measures were in the Animals Abroad Bill, which the government dropped earlier this year in a dramatic U-turn to the anger of campaigners who have devoted years fighting for the changes.The bill also included a ban on the advertising of cruel tourism activities abroad, such as elephant rides and elephant entertainment venues.The heads of 38 organisations have joined forces to back the letter, including the RSPCA, the Born Free Foundation, Peta, World Animal Protection, World Horse Welfare, Compassion in World Farming and Whale & Dolphin Conservation.The sister of a woman killed at an elephant theme park in Thailand last month told The Independent of her bitter disappointment that the government was shying away from a ban, instead stating it expected tourists to do their own research.“How do holidaymakers know if you don’t tell them?” asked Helen Costigan.The Independent previously reported that the various measures were agreed at cabinet level, before Jacob Rees-Mogg, Brandon Lewis and Mark Spencer are thought to have vetoed them – even though the changes were promised in the government’s action plan for animal welfare published last year.Every year, hunters from the UK travel abroad, often to southern Africa, and pay thousands of pounds to legally shoot animals, such as lions, elephants and even baboons.They are allowed to bring back body parts such as stuffed heads, paws and horns in a grisly trade that critics say is driving wildlife populations towards extinction.The last Conservative Party election manifesto included a pledge to ban trophy hunt imports. But according to The Times, Mr Johnson has indeed dropped plans to ban the import and sale of foie gras and fur.Conservationists have made repeated trips to Westminster to hand in petitions and have meetings with government representatives over the issues of the imports and adverts.The charities’ latest letter tells the prime minister: “We would welcome the opportunity to meet with your office and discuss the government’s plans and ambitions for animals in the next session and look forward to hearing from you.”Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International/UK, said: “Boris Johnson made a promise to the people that after Brexit, Britain would become world leaders in animal welfare.“He can keep that promise by ensuring that the Animals Abroad Bill with proposed bans on cruel fur, foie gras, shark fins and other horrors, is in the Queen’s speech next week. More

Some energy suppliers have excessively hiked customers’ direct debit payments beyond what is required, the business secretary has said as he gave them a three-week deadline to explain themselves or face “substantial fines”. Household energy bills have soared in the UK after the regulator Ofgem raised its price cap by 54 per cent in April in response to a record rise in wholesale gas prices – bringing an average increase of £693. But the regulator warned a fortnight later that it had seen “troubling signs” of “bad practices” by some suppliers, including potentially “increasing direct debit payments by more than is necessary”, amid reports that some customers have seen their payments double – or even triple.In a blog post on 14 April, Ofgem’s chief executive, Jonathan Brearley, said there were also concerns regarding some suppliers’ “troubling” treatment of vulnerable customers when they fall into difficulties, and of firms potentially “directing customers to tariffs that may not be in their best interest”.Mr Brearley said Ofgem was commissioning a series of market compliance reviews that would include “stricter supervision of how direct debits are handled” by suppliers and ensure they are “held to higher standards for overall performance on customer service and protecting vulnerable customers”.Upping the ante on Tuesday afternoon, Kwasi Kwarteng outright accused some suppliers of “increasing direct debits beyond what is required” – and said some could face “substantial fines”.He said: “Some energy suppliers have been increasing direct debits beyond what is required.“I can confirm Ofgem has today issued compliance reviews. Suppliers have three weeks to respond. The regulator will not hesitate to swiftly enforce compliance, including issuing substantial fines.”Dozens of energy suppliers have collapsed in the UK in the space of little more than a year, leaving behind millions of customers, and potentially adding billions of pounds to the cost of energy bills.But Mr Brearley claimed last month that “one of the root causes of the failures of many of those suppliers” is related to the way that they have managed the money paid to them by customers.The Ofgem chief accused some firms of using customer credit balances “to prop up their finances, enabling them to follow more risky business models with reduced financial resilience and higher likelihood of failure”.A spokesperson for Energy UK, which represents energy companies, told the BBC on Tuesday: “Suppliers are required to set [direct debits] at a fair and reasonable level based on the customer’s individual circumstances, taking into account factors like previous energy use or record with previous payments.“It is right that the regulator is looking to ensure that suppliers are complying with those requirements. Customers who do have concerns with the level of their direct debit payments should contact their supplier.”Inflation and the cost of living crisis have emerged as the top issues in local elections across the UK on Thursday, and Boris Johnson has faced increasing calls from opposition parties to impose a windfall tax on energy giants to ease the burden of household bills.But Cabinet divisions over such a move were exposed this week, as Mr Kwarteng argued firmly against an “arbitrary” windfall tax, just days after the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, indicated he was ready to consider the move.Pressed repeatedly over the idea in interviews on Tuesday, Mr Johnson rejected the move, saying: “If you start whacking huge taxes on business, in the end you deter investment and you slow down growth.”“If BP wants to pay a windfall tax then that’s another matter but the clear advice we have is that we need those big companies to invest,” he told Times Radio, adding: “We are in constant discussion with them.” More

Ministers have abandoned plans to send the first asylum-seekers to Rwanda this month as promised, prompting accusations that they are blaming legal challenges rather than admit that the idea is “unworkable”. When the multi-million pound deal was announced last month, Boris Johnson said the first flights would take off within “weeks” – but his spokesperson on Tuesday said it would now be “a matter of months”.No 10 has blamed legal challenges against the policy but also insisted court action would not put the controversial project “on hold”.Charities and lawyers said the delay indicated that ministers had accepted that the challenges of implementing the policy were “far greater than it had anticipated”, and that there was now a likelihood that it could “easily unravel” because the logistics have “simply not been thought through”. Meanwhile, one Home Office source believes the government “actually wants” legal challenges so that ministers can “point to their frustration at being blocked by the courts and push for more power over court decisions.”The source told The Independent that the current policy “will be difficult” to implement, but added: “I don’t think politically they will abandon the idea though, it will carry into the next election manifesto I would guess.”Experts had questioned Mr Johnson’s claim that the scheme – which he has said will see tens of thousands of people deported there after arriving in the UK via irregular means – could start almost immediately, with some doubting whether any refugees would ever be sent to Rwanda.The prime minister’s spokesman acknowledged that the legal action was not “unexpected” and described it as only “one of the variables” affecting hopes for the scheme.“We are working to get the first flights moving – I don’t know definitely what timescale that will be,” he added.An analysis by the Refugee Council last month found that fewer than 200 asylum seekers would be deported to the east African country under existing immigration rules, casting doubt over the prime minister’s claims.Enver Solomon, chief executive of the charity, said: “The government’s desire to treat people as human cargo and expelling them to Rwanda is not only appallingly and unprincipled – it also unworkable.“The government now seems to be accepting that the challenges of making it a reality are far greater than it had anticipated. There’s a likelihood that it could now easily unravel and certainly never be on a scale the prime minister said it could be.”Sonya Sceats, chief executive at Freedom from Torture, a charity bringing one of the legal challenges, said: “It is obvious that ministers are hiding behind court cases rather than admit that this inhumane plan is unworkable.“Critical operational considerations have simply not been thought through, including the risks of sharing sensitive data about refugees with a repressive state known to practice torture.”Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael said the “cruel” plan was “rapidly turning into yet another expensive mess”, adding: “It isn’t deterring people from crossing the Channel, and it’s already mired in predictable delays. “Everything the Conservatives have done has only made this problem worse. It’s time they realised that the best way to prevent the crossings, and combat the smuggling and trafficking gangs, is to provide safe and legal routes to sanctuary for refugees.”Around 550 people have crossed from France in small boats in the last two days following an 11-day pause, casting doubts over claims by some Conservative MPs that the Rwanda threat is already acting as a deterrent.The government has argued legal powers already exist to allow asylum-seekers to be sent to Rwanda, but critics argue it breaches both the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Geneva Convention.Toufique Hossain, director of public law at Duncan Lewis, which is representing the civil service union (Public and Commercial Services Union) and two charities in a court challenge against the policy, said the delay “could suggest that the home secretary has finally worked out what most people already know – the plans are unworkable, unlawful and a huge waste of tax payers’ money”. Immigration lawyer Alasdair Mackenzie echoed his remarks, saying: “Legal challenges will undoubtedly – and rightly – happen, but they’d be a convenient smokescreen for the fact that the practical mechanics of the Rwanda plan – who qualifies, where will they live, how do you stop them coming back, etc – have blatantly not been thought through.”A Home Office spokesperson said: “This world-leading Migration Partnership will overhaul our broken asylum system, which is currently costing the UK taxpayer £1.5bn a year – the highest amount in two decades.“It means those arriving dangerously, illegally or unnecessarily can be relocated to have their asylum claims considered and, if recognised as refugees, build their lives there.“Our new Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda fully complies with international and national law. We will defend any legal challenge robustly.” More

Most asylum seekers in Calais are still hoping to make it to the UK despite plans that could see them sent to Rwanda, according to a new survey. A charity polled those waiting in migrant camps in northern France in the days since the British government passed a law making it a criminal offence to knowingly arrive without permission.Care4Calais found most had heard of the deal with Rwanda, which will see people who arrive “illegally” in the UK under new immigration rules sent to the east African country to apply for asylum there instead.Three quarters of those polled said the plans would not put them off making the Channel crossing, the charity said.Care4Calais said it did not find the results surprising. “Rwanda is getting headlines but at its core it’s really just another in a long line of deterrence policies announced by this government over the last few years. And let’s face it – they’ve all failed,” it said in a tweet.Around 350 were found crossing the Channel in small boats on Sunday. More people thought to be migrants were seen being brought in to Dover on Monday.It came after what is believed to have been an 11-day break in activity, when no crossings were recorded amid reports of strong winds and choppy seas.The Home Office is facing two legal challenges – including one involving Care4Calais – over its plans to send asylum seekers overseas to have their claims decided.The proposal has been met with criticisms from the United Nations refugee agency, the Church of England, charities and Home Office staff since it was revealed last month.Care4Calais said they wanted to see safe and legal routes for those fleeing dangerous situations instead.“The answer to many problems in Calais is to let refugees apply for visas to cross the Channel safely, because now – unless you’re Ukrainian – there’s no safe way for a refugee to get to the UK and claim asylum,” it said. “That would put people smugglers out of business and save lives.”The Home Office has been approached for comment. More

The RSPCA is hailing what it calls “a milestone week” for animal welfare as three new long-fought for animal protection measures become law.The use of glue traps, condemned by campaigners as “crude devices that cause horrific suffering”, will be banned in England – although with two loopholes.One is that selling the traps will still be legal. Humane Society UK said that although the sale of glue traps cannot also be banned unilaterally in England without the same ban in the other three nations of the UK, it would write to retailers in England to urge them to withdraw from sale traps that will no longer be legal to use. The other loophole is that professional pest-controllers will be able to apply for licences to use the traps, which leave rodents, birds and pets suffering stress, exhaustion, dehydration or injuries for hours or days as they struggle to get free.Meanwhile, people who fail to properly care for their pets, zoo animals and livestock could face new fixed-penalty fines of up to £5,000.Under the new legislation, fines could be handed out to pet breeders who fail to microchip puppies before rehoming them, horse owners tethering animals in a way that neglects their basic needs or farmers transporting livestock that are not fit to travel.The fixed-penalty notices are intended to “bridge the gap” between offering advice and prosecution, and the idea is they should reduce pressure on the courts.The police will be able to issue the fines, but not the RSPCA.At the same time, the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill, which also gained Royal Assent, will oblige ministers to take into account the fact that animals experience feelings and emotions when they are making policy decisions.The government sparked controversy when it failed to carry over sentience from EU legislation into UK law after Brexit.A new Animal Sentience Committee made up of experts will be created to hold government to account on how well its decisions have taken account of the welfare of animals, publishing reports that ministers need to respond to in Parliament.Emma Slawinski, of the RSPCA, said: “It’s a good week for animal welfare; the RSPCA has been campaigning on glue traps, animal sentience and fixed penalty notices for a long time.“We are now pressing the government to introduce bans on the import of foie gras and fur, and for it to implement the Kept Animals Bill so that live exports of animals for slaughter, keeping primates as pets and the cruel puppy import trade can also be banned once and for all.”The Kept Animals Bill is due to continue its passage into law via a carryover motion in the next parliamentary session.However, the government appears to have dropped the Animals Abroad Bill, which would have banned the import of foie gras and fur, and banned adverts for cruel animal attractions abroad. More

The record-high numbers of sex crimes recorded by police in England and Wales are likely the “tip of the iceberg”, campaigners have warned.New figures show sexual offences hit their highest level from December 2020 to December 2021 – rising to 183,587 crimes. This is a 22 per cent surge from the year before and an increase of 13 per cent from 2019.The fresh data, released by the Office for National Statistics on Thursday, revealed there was a significant rise in reports of sexual offences after the government loosened lockdown rules.Some 67,125 rapes were reported from December 2020 to December 2021 – meaning rapes made up 37 per cent of the sexual offences recorded. This constitutes a 21 per cent rise from 55,592 reports of rape in the 12 months to December 2020.However, convictions for rape remain at an all-time low, with the prosecution rate nosediving to only 1.3 per cent of recorded rapes in England and Wales earlier in the year.Rebecca Hitchen, of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, told The Independent: “In the last couple of years, we’ve seen high profile cases of violence against women put sexual offences firmly on the public agenda.“This data may therefore reflect greater awareness and inclination to report to the police. However, while around a third of reported rapes relate to domestic abuse it may also be true that the easing of lockdowns and return of socialising led to increased opportunity and impunity with which perpetrators might offend.“What we know is that these figures remain the tip of the iceberg, as reporting does not feel like an option for many women, particularly those who face discrimination on the basis of their race, immigration status, disability, and other characteristics.”Ms Hitchen warned those women coming forward to report rape and sexual assault are being treated like they are the ones who are under investigation instead of being given proper support.She warned the current system “blames and harms them, inappropriately focuses on their ‘credibility’ and in the vast majority of cases, will not bring them justice”.Ms Hitchen added: “This is a national scandal and despite commitments in the government’s Rape Review, nothing is really changing. This latest data from the Office for National Statistics must be a wake-up call to the government that our broken justice system needs a radical overhaul.”Jayne Butler, chief executive of Rape Crisis England and Wales, said the “vast majority” of rapes and sexual assaults are never reported to the police by victims so the rise in people coming forward is “encouraging”.She added: “It is likely these figures reflect a gradual increase in survivors’ willingness to pursue criminal justice rather than an increase in the number of sexual offences being committed.“The figures also reflect the growing number of adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse who are now coming forward.”Ms Butler noted this increase in people reporting sexual offences to the police has gone hand in hand with the “unprecedented levels of need and demand” for her organisation’s specialist Rape Crisis services in recent years.There are currently 12,000 people on Rape Crisis waiting lists, Ms Butler added, as she argued “long-term, sustainable funding” for services which help victims of sexual offences is “more urgently needed than ever”.Emily Hunt, who alleges she was raped in May 2015, told The Independent the rise in sexual offences reports is “fundamentally good news” as it shows people feel able to report to the police.The 42-year-old, who is an independent adviser to the government on the Rape Review, added: “They are not just helping themselves pursue justice. They are helping to stop future rapes. “They deserve our thanks. We know from academic research and from police forces that a lot of rapists are serial offenders. The majority of uncaught rapists go on to do it again. A US study found they rape on average at least 5.8 times in the course of their lives.”Ms Hunt said the suspect-focused investigation model for rape gives her hope as she explained it is changing the way rape is investigated across England and Wales but is still in its “early phases”.She claims she was treated badly by the police when she came forward to allege she had been raped. “I absolutely lived through the victim blaming and shaming from the police,” she said. “The police investigated me and my credibility instead of my attacker.”Ms Hunt claimed she woke up without any clothes in a hotel bed in London next to a man she says she had never seen before.Ms Hunt claimed she was filmed naked without her consent – adding that the police only told her about the naked video of her just over a year after the alleged incident took place. She said her last memory was of having lunch with a family member in a local restaurant five hours earlier, adding that she felt as if she had been drugged and also suspected she had been raped.The man was arrested on suspicion of rape in 2015 but denied the allegations and was not charged because of a lack of evidence.Commenting on the latest figures on sexual offences, Dame Vera Baird QC, victims’ commissioner for England, said: “We know that the majority of victims do not report, and thousands of rapes and sexual assaults take place each year without any sort of criminal justice outcome. Issues with the policing and prosecuting of rape are also well documented.“So, it is somewhat positive to see that victims are not being put off reporting. My hope is that we do not betray these victims’ trust like we have failed so many victims in the past.”Ruth Davison, chief executive of Refuge, the UK’s largest provider of shelters for domestic abuse victims, said the charity “constantly” sees investigations into sexual crimes “re-traumatising survivors”. This results in them either pulling out of cases or not reporting offences in the first place, she added.“A ‘record high’ in sexual offences is a devastating phrase to read,” she added. “Serious action is needed to address not only the rise in offences but the woefully low rate of prosecutions that this and other recent data has shown.”The fresh data released by the Office for National Statistics also revealed a rise in domestic abuse-related offences logged – with researchers discounting fraud crimes.There were 895,782 offences recorded as domestic abuse-related in 2021, which is a 7 per cent rise from the year before.Sarah Davidge, of Women’s Aid, a leading domestic abuse charity, told The Independent: “It is vital to acknowledge that many survivors do not report to the police, meaning this is likely to be the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the scale of domestic abuse in this country.“Less than a fifth of women report to the police so we know the true number of women experiencing abuse is much higher than police recorded data.”Between two and three women are murdered each week by their partners or ex-partners in England and Wales, while one in four women will suffer domestic abuse at some point during their lives. More

Labour councils across the north of England have repeatedly lost seats because leading councillors have spent too much time complaining about austerity rather than dealing with it more dynamically, the leader of one of its flagship authorities has said.Graeme Miller, leader of Sunderland City Council, says a decade of government cuts have left many local authorities barely able to offer bare minimum services: library, social care and cultural budgets have all been slashed across much of the country.But he thinks voters in the old Red Wall have grown weary of Labour councils continually blaming Conservative fiscal policy for the problems they face.“For a period of time saying austerity was killing us was fair but over [12 years] the public gets tone deaf to it and understandably so,” he said. “People just want to see services being delivered. So, if you’ve spent too long saying ‘austerity austerity austerity’, people are going to turn away from you. We need to get on with being positive. Explain why there may be a reduction in services – why we’re cutting the grass less or there’s more pot holes – but tell people what we’re doing to make things better.”He added: “Sunderland has lost more than £350 million – it’s almost impossible to live with – but what have to do is deliver either more with the same or the same with less.”He spoke out as fears emerged that the party might lose control of the north-east city’s council for the first time since it was formed in 197. Internal Conservative polling is said to suggest the reds could lose six seats here on 5 May, denying the party its historic majority on Wearside.The loss – should it happen – would follow a devastating set of local election results last year in which the party saw more than 320 councillors voted out, including nine in Sunderland. Majority control of one-time redoubts including Sheffield and Northumberland was also surrendered on a horror night for the party.Now, although Councillor Miller says he is confident Labour will retain Sunderland Council and make gains across the north, he admitted many voters appeared to feel the party had taken them for granted for too long.“We have to work hard to gain the trust of people again by doing,” said the 59-year-old, whose own seat is also up for re-election this year. “And if we’re honest, that probably explains why we’ve lost support in places like Darlington, Hartlepool, Stockton, Middlesborough – because these are big Labour areas that we should be strong in, and we need to work out how we get back there.” More