Independent Premium

Tribal as people tend to be, the display, or not, of flags, banners and emblems tends to be a contentious affair, even in the most liberal of democracies and usually tolerant of populations. Even in states where the burning or other desecration of the flag is illegal, such as France, disrespect is sometimes shown as a gesture of political dissent or defiance. As with statues and historical monuments, flags have the power, often as not, to divide as well as to unite communities. When political parties attempt to appropriate a flag to themselves, the reaction among others can be especially severe.Such is the case with the sudden popularity of the union flag among British ministers and other Conservative politicians. In the past, the Tories, the party of empire, were happier than most to drape a union flag over a trestle table at a public meeting or decorate a manifesto with a few, to remind the voters of their opponents supposed and implied lack of patriotism. But it was a trick sparingly used, even by the likes of Margaret Thatcher, who once semi-jokingly draped a hanky over a model of a British Airways plane featuring one of its then new international ethnic designs, rather than the traditional red, white and blue. No longer. Cabinet ministers now seem to compete as to who can manage to jam the most and the biggest union flags into a Zoom call. When the communities secretary, Robert Jenrick, was gently teased about his union jack “rating” when he appeared on BBC Breakfast, the presenters, Naga Munchetty and Charlie Stayt, were publicly reprimanded by BBC management. A Tory backbencher even asked the BBC why it didn’t have more union flags in its annual review.Read more: More

It may seem surprising, but it is perfectly possible, that is to say legal, for the government to directly intervene in the operation of a local authority, and indeed the power to do so by central government has pretty much always existed, one way or another. The earliest example of such a battle of wills occurred a century ago, in Poplar, east London, when a working-class socialist council refused to put the rates (council tax) up and risked going to prison as a result. The spirit of what was then called “Poplarism”, usually pitting Labour councils against Tory governments, remains in certain quarters to this day. Yet the most important thing about the appointment by the government of commissioners to oversee Liverpool City Council, apart from its impact on the city and its people, is that it is not really a political, or at least a party political move. There are many examples of such politicking, especially in Liverpool, but here it arises from police investigations and the arrest of five men, including the mayor of Liverpool, Joe Anderson, in relation to city council matters. As a result of that, Robert Jenrick, the secretary of state for housing, communities and local government, decided last December to exercise the powers granted to him under the Local Government Act 1999, and ordered Max Caller to carry out an inspection of the authority’s compliance with its “best value duty”. More

A year on from the first lockdown, and the old firm make another not-quite-celebratory appearance at a Downing Street Covid-19 press briefing. The prime minister, with his principal lieutenants, the chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, and the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, aka the two gentlemen of corona, reprised their triple act, for the benefit of a nation roughly where it started, in lockdown. They are older, wiser and and no doubt chastened by the ordeals of the past 12 months (during which Boris Johnson and Whitty caught Covid). Another year over, and what have the press conferences done?In the earliest days of the pandemic they played a vital role in public education and accountability, as the officials and the prime minister were subjected to daily questioning about this mysterious and terrifying new virus. The cast list gradually developed, with other clinicians and showings and alternative ministers leading proceedings, but up until June they were held every day. After that the frequency was gradually wound down as the first lockdown was relaxed, adding perhaps to a false sense of security during the summer of 2020. In due course, through the tier system and then the second full lockdown the frequency has picked up, though weekend sessions (as with the announcement of lockdown number 2) are rare and they are kept to a half an hour, compared with an hour plus in the early days. The first press conference was in fact held on 16 March last year, by Johnson, Whitty and Vallance. Johnson asked for voluntary self-isolation, and a few days later expressed the hope that the coronavirus tide would be turned in 12 weeks. Those were the days. Mostly they have been informative rather than sensational, and the advisers have mostly refrained from taking the opportunity to publicly chastise ministers. More

The verdict of the independent inquiry into Nicola Sturgeon’s behaviour during the Salmond affair could not be clearer: “I am of the opinion that the first minister did not breach the provisions of the ministerial code in respect of any of these matters.” The “verdict”, determined by James Hamilton QC, former attorney general of Ireland, cannot be challenged on the grounds that he is partisan or otherwise unreliable. Unlike the committee of Scottish parliamentarians, with an opposition majority, who narrowly found that Ms Sturgeon had offered “inaccurate” evidence to them, and thus arguably misled the parliament, the Hamilton judgment is unequivocal, and relates precisely to the terms of the ministerial code. This requires ministers never to knowingly mislead MSPs, and plainly Ms Sturgeon did not. It gets better for Ms Sturgeon. Overplaying their hand, the Scottish Conservatives gambled on a more damning report coming out, and had already tabled a vote of no confidence in the first minister. With the SNP and the Greens backing her she will win that vote, cementing her victory and uniting her own party, at least cosmetically. By the end of the day Ms Sturgeon will be able to say that she has been vindicated by an independent inquiry and has the confidence of parliament, which now goes into recess, ready to launch the SNP campaign for the Holyrood elections on 3 May. Ms Sturgeon will be hoping for a fresh overall majority, a personal vote of confidence from the Scottish electorate, plus a mandate to seek a second independence referendum. More

Rishi Sunak is facing questions about his role in the Greensill lobbying affair. But just what is it?This week the Financial Times reported that specialist bank Greensill Capital had lobbied the Treasury to include the firm in state-backed emergency Covid loan schemes.Under these schemes, the Treasury underwrote loans issued by banks to help businesses facing disruption due to the pandemic. More

It has long been a political convention across democracies that when someone lies to Parliament, they have to resign their position. That’s about as clear as it gets, however. In the case of whether Nicola Sturgeon lied to the Scottish parliament about the Salmond affair, there is also now the question of who decides and what the exact test is for “misleading” Is it the committee of MSPs who will report imminently, and whose proceedings have been leaked. Or is it the independent QC specially charged by Ms Sturgeon herself with answering the question. And if she did lie or mislead the Scottish Parliament and thus the Scottish people did she do so “knowingly” or deliberately. How can one tell? And how important do they – Parliament and people – think any of this is, anyway? There are no protest marches or riots in the streets calling for Sturgeon to go – quite the opposite, with many unable to follow the technical, procedural lawyerly wrangling. Covid and Brexit feel like bigger deals. For what it’s worth, here are the relevant stentorian passages in section 1.3 of the Scottish Ministerial Code: “It is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate and truthful information to the Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead the Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the First Minister; More

The prime minister’s former adviser, Dominic Cummings, admires original thinking, despises needless bureaucracy and has a reputation for unpredictability, of which there was a great deal on display in his testimony to the Commons Science and Technology Select Committee. It gave the MPs and the viewing public alike a rare insight into life in Downing Street in the Cummings era. The biggest surprise was that Cummings turned up at all. He remains in contempt of parliament for refusing to attend a previous select committee hearing two years ago. That was about the Vote Leave referendum campaign that Cummings had run. Cummings was arrogant enough to demand that MPs swear an oath, if that was what he was required to do. A good deal has changed since then, and Cummings was charm itself as he dilated on some of his favourite topics and explained the thinking behind the new Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria). This will be Cummings’s “other legacy”, aside from his lockdown busting last summer and his summary dismissal before Christmas. More