UK

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailThe Government’s plans to extend 4G mobile connectivity in rural areas are behind schedule, according to a report from the National Audit Office (NAO).It said the Shared Rural Network programme funded by the Government and the country’s biggest mobile operators to bring 95% 4G mobile coverage across the UK landmass by 2025 had so far only seen one network meet its interim coverage target, and questions remained over whether the 95% target would be met on time.The network sees operators sharing infrastructure in order to boost mobile signal in the countryside.It is unclear whether the Shared Rural Network programme will achieve its coverage target on time; costs are higher than anticipated; and government has not clearly articulated the benefits of aspects of the programme, including increased connectivity in sparsely populated areasGareth Davies, National Audit OfficeWhile the report acknowledged that the rollout has been hampered by the Covid-19 pandemic, opposition from local campaign groups and local authorities’ capacity to handle planning applications, it also said the Government and mobile operators had taken longer than expected to finalise mast locations and to agree other aspects about the sites.The report warned that estimated costs had also risen, and indicated that these additional pressures mean operators may not be able to deliver the level of coverage required within the current funding.The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) business case suggests the scheme will deliver economic benefits of more than £1.35 billion by supporting business and tourism in rural areas.However, the NAO report said the Government had so far provided limited evidence of the specific business case benefits of extending mobile coverage into sparsely populated areas.The NAO recommended improving oversight of the mobile operators on the Shared Rural Network scheme to ensure there was sufficient focus on delivering 4G coverage and performance for consumers and businesses.Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: “Demand for mobile data access is expected to increase as data-intensive services become more popular and new technologies enable new uses, and government has set out a clear ambition for improved connectivity.“It is unclear whether the Shared Rural Network programme will achieve its coverage target on time; costs are higher than anticipated; and government has not clearly articulated the benefits of aspects of the programme, including increased connectivity in sparsely populated areas.”The programme remains on track to deliver 95% UK 4G coverage by the end of 2025, with coverage already available across 93% of UK landmassDepartment for Science, Innovation and TechnologyResponding to the report, a DSIT spokesperson said: “This is premature.“The programme remains on track to deliver 95% UK 4G coverage by the end of 2025, with coverage already available across 93% of UK landmass.“We will continue to work with mobile network operators to ensure the programme is delivered on time and that the crucial coverage improvements are delivered across rural parts of the country.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailSir Lindsay Hoyle is under pressure to stand down as speaker following chaos in the Commons when Conservative and SNP MPs walked out in protest at his handling of the much-talked about Gaza ceasefire vote.A total of 33 MPs have signed a motion of no confidence in the speaker after his actions, accused of favouring Labour, prompted anger.Sir Lindsay had deviated from long-standing procedures to allow a Labour amendment to the SNP motion on a ceasefire to be debated and voted on. He later made a statement to apologise profusely, saying he regretted what had happened – but it was met by jeers from some quarters of the chamber, and he’s now under pressure to resign from the job he has held since November 2019.Among those to sign the Early Day Motion of no confidence are Tories Lee Anderson, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown and Brendan Clarke-Smith.Announcing procedures on an SNP motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict, Sir Lindsay had been expected to select just the government amendment seeking an “immediate humanitarian pause” to the fighting.But he defied convention in deciding the Commons would first vote on Labour’s amendment before moving on to further votes on the SNP’s original motion – and then the government’s proposals only if either of the first two failed to garner enough support.House of Commons Clerk Tom Goldsmith had warned him about the unprecedented nature of his decision, saying he felt compelled to point out that long-established conventions were not being followed.The move sparked fury from the Conservative and SNP benches.Commons Leader Penny Mordaunt pulled the government’s participation, claiming Sir Lindsay had hijacked the debate and undermined the confidence of the House in its long-standing rules by selecting Labour’s amendment first.SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said he would take significant convincing that the Speaker’s position was “not now intolerable” and claimed his party had been treated with “complete and utter contempt”.He said he was disappointed that a “pantomime” in the Commons was detracting from the crisis in Gaza.SNP MP Pete Wishart called for the speaker to go, saying: “I think it’s intolerable, and it’s really difficult to know how you could remain in the chair after what happened today.“Now I know he came down and took responsibility and said sorry, but quite frankly it’s not good enough.”He added: “I think (it) requires him to look at his situation as Speaker of the House of Commons.“And I know that nearly all of my colleagues have signed the early day motion asking for him to go, and speaking to several Conservative colleagues this evening, I know that a great number of them have also signed that, too.”He added: “I cannot see a route for him to be able to command the respect of the whole of the House which will enable (him) to be in that chair.”Mr Flynn also called for an investigation as he appeared to suggest Labour figures had exerted pressure on the speaker. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailLiz Truss has delivered an apocalyptic warning that “the West is doomed” unless right-wing politicians like her are put in power to save it.Echoing the rhetoric of Donald Trump, she blamed the “deep state” for her downfall as prime minister when her policies sparked an economic crash.Ms Truss made her controversial comments in an article for Fox News TV, the right-wing US television station credited with helping Mr Trump win power.Liz Truss recently launched the right-wing pressure group Popular Conservatism Mr Trump claimed a secretive network of powerful officials and state institutes – the “deep state” – plotted to thwart his aims.Critics dismissed it as a conspiracy theory aimed at blaming others for his failings.Ms Truss said: “In too much of the free world, the left has been in charge for too long and the results are all too plain to see. Their agents are only too active in public and private institutions and what we have come to know as the administrative state and the deep state.”She said she had seen it for herself first hand as the unnamed figures and bodies “sabotaged my efforts in Britain to cut taxes, reduce the size of government and restore democratic accountability”.Her brief period in No 10 is best remembered for her catastrophic mini-Budget which sent the pound into a nose dive and sparked a crash in the markets.Sunak reveals response to Truss being outlasted by lettuce: ‘Country was in tough spot’In her opinion piece, Ms Truss appeared to all but endorse Mr Trump’s bid for re-election.Going even so far as to claim that “left-wing elites” will be “aided and abetted by our enemies in China, Iran and Russia” to undermine Western societies from within, Ms Truss continued: “In a vital election year for the US, it is why we don’t just need a conservative in the White House. “We need one who is able to take on the deep rot of the deep state and lead the free world.”Her provocative comments are likely to attract ridicule from detractors who say she proved a reckless and incompetent prime minister, whose policies caused people’s mortgage repayments to soar.But her allies insist her policies have since been proven right – and many Tories believe Ms Truss harbours aims of regaining the Tory leadership when Rishi Sunak leaves office, despite lasting just 49 days in Downing Street before being forced to step down.The failed PM is striving to place herself at the forefront of a new brand of right-wing politics, recently lauching her so-called Popular Conservatism movement and now travelling to Washington, DC, where she is due to give a speech at the Republican CPAC event on Thursday.Mr Trump is also due to speak at the event, alongside MyPillow chief executive Mike Lindell, politician Tulsi Gabbard and Steve Bannon. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailSir Keir Starmer has avoided potentially the biggest rebellion of his leadership after Labour MPs were given the chance to vote for the party’s own amendment to an SNP motion calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. The Labour leader had been warned tens of Labour MPs could rebel on Wednesday over the SNP motion, which calls for an immediate ceasefire in the conflict, the release of all hostages held by Hamas and “an end to the collective punishment of the Palestinian people”.Under growing pressure, Sir Keir hardened his stance on Israel’s invasion in recent days to also call for an immediate ceasefire.Labour submitted an amendment to the SNP’s motion which also called for a ceasefire, but stopped short of accusing Israel of “collective punishment” and stressed that Israel “cannot be expected to cease fighting if Hamas continues with violence”. Sir Keir’s approach was thrown into jeopardy hours before the looming vote when the government tabled its own amendment – which under typical parliamentary procedure would supercede Labour’s, leaving his MPs with the choice of either backing the SNP, Tories, or abstaining on calls for a ceasefire.But, in a huge relief for Sir Keir, Commons speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle announced that, in an “exceptional” move, MPs will be given the chance to vote on Labour’s amendments. Sir Lindsay was met with howls of “shame” and “bring back [former Commons speaker John] Bercow” from Tory and SNP MPs, who felt he had sided with Labour in order to let Sir Keir save face. MPs will now be allowed to vote on Labour’s position, followed by the SNP’s and the government’s, meaning Labour MPs facing pressure in their constituencies can vote for a ceasefire in Gaza without rebelling against Sir Keir. Sir Lindsay said it was a “highly sensitive subject” on which “feelings are running high”.“I think it is important on this occasion that the House is able to consider the widest possible range of options,” he said. Sir Lindsay added: “I have therefore decided to select the amendments both in the name of the prime minister and in the name of the leader of the opposition.”But Tory MP William Wragg, chairman of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, tabled a so-called early day motion saying: “That this house has no confidence in Mr Speaker.” Sir Keir has been facing growing pressure from his own MPs to back a ceasefire in Gaza, having appeared in recent days to be outflanked to the left by foreign secretary David Cameron, with his shift in stance last weekend then arguably overshadowed by Prince William’s surprise intervention calling for urgent peace. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailWatch live as MPs debate a crunch Gaza ceasefire vote.The vote on a motion calling for a ceasefire takes place amid mounting concerns about a possible Israeli attack on Rafah.Labour had hoped to avoid another rebellion over the Israel-Hamas war by tabling an amendment to an SNP motion demanding an immediate ceasefire in the region.Sir Keir’s party on Tuesday publicly shifted its stance to back a call for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”, giving MPs who were unhappy with the leadership’s previous handling of the issue a wording to rally behind.But the government has put down its own amendment to the proposal, raising the possibility that the Commons speaker will not choose Labour’s amendment for a debate.If that happens, it would leave Labour MPs with the choice between voting for the government’s position, which does not go as far as calling for an immediate ceasefire, backing the SNP’s stance, or abstaining altogether.Ahead of the debate, Mr Sunak faces Sir Keir at PMQs. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailA war of words has erupted between Boris Johnson and Tucker Carlson over claims the former prime minister was prepared to debate the controversial right-wing journalist for $1million.Mr Carlson, who this month interviewed Vladimir Putin, said Mr Johnson had demanded $1million for a sitdown interview on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.But Mr Johnson has disputed Mr Carlson’s account as “untrue”, with allies of the ex-PM saying he had offered to take part in the interview for a $1million donation to Ukrainian veterans’ charities.Mr Carlson also mocked Mr Johnson, joking that ‘his name’s not actually Boris’ It is understood Mr Johnson pulled out after the murder of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.Mr Carlson has been ridiculed in recent weeks over his support for Putin and the Kremlin, having filmed videos praising Russian shopping trolleys and admiring Moscow’s subway system.It came after the former Fox News host sat down for a fawning two-hour interview with the authoritarian Russian leader.Mr Johnson attacked Mr Carlson’s Putin interview, saying it was straight out of “Hitler’s playbook”.He said the American broadcaster had been the “stooge of the tyrant, the dictaphone to the dictator and a traitor to journalism”.And, in a column for Mail+, he accused Mr Carlson of betraying “viewers and listeners around the world” for not taking the Russian leader to task for “the torture, the rapes, the blowing up of kindergartens” in Ukraine, “not once did he even try to dam the flow of lies”.And, speaking to right-wing outlet The Blaze, Mr Carlson hit back at the ex-PM.“Boris Johnson, who was for a short time the Prime Minister of Great Britain… calls me a tool of the Kremlin or something,” he said.He added: “I was annoyed. So I put in a request for an interview with Boris Johnson, as I have many times because he’s constantly denouncing me as a tool of the Kremlin. He says no.”Mr Carlson said after reaching out to “a lot of people who know Boris Johnson” he was told he would do the interview “but it’s going to cost you $1million”.“I said to the guy… I just interviewed Vladimir Putin. I’m not defending Putin, but Putin didn’t ask for a million dollars. So you’re telling me that Boris Johnson is a lot sleazier than Vladimir Putin?“Which is true.”A spokesman for Mr Johnson said: “This account is untrue.”Mr Carlson also mocked Mr Johnson, whose real name is Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.“His name’s not actually Boris… his name is Alex Johnson, he called himself Boris in high school, so the guy who calls himself Boris is accusing me?” he added. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailConfidence in Britain’s new online safety regime could be undermined by a lack of “tangible” improvement, MPs have warned.Communications regulator Ofcom has been given the job of implementing the regime introduced by last year’s Online Safety Act, which requires providers of online services to minimise the extent of illegal and harmful content.But in a report published on Wednesday, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee said full implementation of the new rules had been delayed by a year, while the way Ofcom will handle complaints risks leaving the public “disappointed”.The report said: “As the regulatory regime will not be fully implemented until 2026, there is a risk that public confidence in the regime will be undermined if it does not quickly bring about tangible changes to people’s online experience.”(Ofcom) must now continue to be proactively frank with the public over what the Online Safety Act does and does not empower it to do, lest confidence in the new regime be swiftly underminedDame Meg Hillier, Public Accounts CommitteeUnder the new regime, Ofcom will be unable to act on individual complaints and can only step in when there are “systemic concerns” about a provider, nor does it have a mechanism for telling complainants whether their concerns have contributed to any action.Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said: “Expectations are understandably high for firm guardrails in the hitherto largely unregulated online world.“We know that around two thirds of UK children and adults say they experienced at least one potential online harm in a month in 2022, according to Ofcom, which is to be commended for how swiftly it has moved to take on its new responsibilities.“It must now continue to be proactively frank with the public over what the Online Safety Act does and does not empower it to do, lest confidence in the new regime be swiftly undermined.”The committee said Ofcom was well prepared for its new role, and noted that it had already achieved some success in ensuring a website promoting suicide was blocked for UK users.But full implementation of the new rules has slipped from 2025 to 2026, while the April 2025 deadline for bringing in parts of the regulations relating to illegal harms and protecting children is considered the “bare minimum” required.MPs also called for more clarity on how fees levied on industry would work, suggesting Ofcom would not recover its set-up costs until 2033, and asked for more detail on how it would deal with internet providers who failed to engage with the regulator.With an estimated 100,000 companies subject to regulation, many of which may be small or based overseas, MPs said it may be difficult to contact some providers.No other country has introduced online safety regulation. Ofcom now needs to capitalise on its early progressDame Meg Hillier, Public Accounts CommitteeIf providers refuse to engage with Ofcom over systemic concerns, the regulator will have the power to levy fines of up to 10% of a company’s global revenue and carry out “business disruption measures”.Dame Meg added: “No other country has introduced online safety regulation. Ofcom now needs to capitalise on its early progress.“It must also accelerate its co-ordination with other regulators both at home and overseas, in the recognition that it is at the forefront of a truly global effort to strike the right balance between freedom and safety online.” More