UK Politics Thread part II

[Jimbuna]

PM Rishi Sunak dismisses Conservative Party chair Nadhim Zahawi following weeks of revelations about his tax affairs.

The prime minister says it is "clear that there has been a serious breach of the Ministerial Code"

Rishi Sunak ordered an investigation after it emerged Zahawi paid a penalty to HMRC while he was chancellor, over previously unpaid tax.

The investigation, led by independent ethics adviser Sir Laurie Magnus, found that Zahawi failed to meet the requirements of the Ministerial Code.

Specifically, the investigation found that Zahawi failed to declare that HMRC were investigating his taxes as a conflict of interest when he became chancellor.

Zahawi also failed to declare that he paid a penalty to HMRC when he was appointed to Liz Truss and then Rishi Sunak's cabinet, the investigation found.

In Zahawi's letter responding to his sacking, he told Sunak to expect his "full support" from the back benches.

[Jimbuna]

New powers to curb strike disruption approved by MPs

MPs have backed plans aimed at enforcing minimum service levels for some sectors during strikes.

Under the bill, some employees, including in the rail industry and emergency services, would be required to work during industrial action - and could be sacked if they refuse.

The bill passed by 315 votes to 246 but will face further scrutiny in the House of Lords before it becomes law.

Labour said the proposals ripped up protections against unfair dismissal.

The party's deputy leader Angela Rayner said the bill would give the government the power to threaten key workers with the sack on a "whim".

Unions have also criticised the bill as an attack on the right to strike, and have threatened legal action if it passes.

But Business Minister Kevin Hollinrake said the the measures were "proportionate and sensible".

"We need to maintain a reasonable balance between the ability to strike and the ability to keep the lives and livelihoods of the British public safe," he told MPs.

The country is facing a wave of industrial action, with unions calling for pay increases to keep up with the rising cost of living.

The bill will not impact the current strikes as it still needs to be passed by the Lords, where it is expected to face more opposition.

It will enable ministers to set minimum service levels for health, fire, education and transport services, as well as border security and nuclear decommissioning.

Under the new law, which will apply to England, Scotland and Wales, the government would set the minimum levels after a consultation.

Employers will then be able to issue a "work notice" to unions, setting out who is required to work during a strike.

Under the legislation, there would be no automatic protection from unfair dismissal for an employee who is told to work through a notice but chooses to strike.

If a strike is not conducted in accordance with the new rules, employers would be also be able to sue unions for losses.

Labour had sought to amend the bill to preserve existing protections for striking workers from unfair dismissal but this was defeated.

Ms Rayner accused the government of rushing the bill through Parliament, meaning it could not be properly scrutinised by MPs.

"Riddled with holes, this bill gives sweeping powers to a power-hungry secretary of state," she told the Commons.

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg also raised concerns about the bill, saying it was "badly written" and vague.

The former business minister said he supported the aims of the legislation and would not vote against it but hoped it would be amended in the House of Lords.

He criticised a so-called "Henry VIII clause" in the bill, which would allow ministers to amend the legislation after it has become law without full parliamentary scrutiny.

"On what basis can any government claim to have the power to amend legislation that has not yet been passed? The only argument for doing it, which no government would wish to advance, could be incompetence," he said.

On Wednesday hundreds of thousands of workers, including teachers, train and bus drivers, civil servants and university staff will walk out in separate disputes over pay, jobs and conditions.

It is set to be the biggest day of strikes since 2011 when a national day of action was held by public sector unions over pensions.

On the same day, protests are being planned across the country against the minimum service legislation, dubbed an "anti-strike bill" by unions.

Next week, nurses and ambulance workers are among those due to strike.

Health unions already provide "life and limb" cover during strikes, because under existing laws it is illegal to take industrial action that would endanger human life.

Precise levels of cover during strikes are often decided on a local basis, after negotiations with the unions.

Meanwhile, firefighters and control room staff who are members of the Fire Brigades Union have also voted to strike over pay.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64456279

[Skybird]

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/31/imf-...ne-in-g7-.html


That leaves one question: whom is the UK at war with that it got sanctioned so heavily to suffer such a deep dip?

[Jimbuna]

British Finance Minister Jeremy Hunt responded to the IMF forecast: “Short-term challenges should not obscure our long-term prospects. The UK outperformed many forecasts last year, and if we stick to our plan to halve inflation, the UK is still predicted to grow faster than Germany and Japan over the coming years.”

[Jimbuna]

Here we go! EU and UK finally in agreement after huge breakthrough over hated Brexit deal

The UK and the European Union are braced for a significant breakthrough on the hated Northern Ireland Protocol, as a major agreement between the two countries has been reached. Britain has reportedly struck a customs deal with the bloc, which could pave the way to finally ending the dispute over Northern Ireland.

The EU is also understood to have made a major concession to the UK, accepting for the first time that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) can only rule on issues relating to Northern Ireland only if a case was referred by the Northern Irish courts.

This is a break from the previous line taken by Brussels, which formerly insisted that the European Commission should be able to take cases straight to the court themselves.

However, there is concern that the UK could make concessions allowing for a bigger role for the ECJ in policing the protocol.

A bigger role for the ECJ would stall any progress in solving the issue, as it would be unacceptable for both the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) - which is currently staging a boycott of the Stormont Assembly in protest of the protocol - and for many in the right wing of the Tory Party.

A Conservative Party insider told the Daily Express that there is "no way" the DUP would accept any further concessions on the ECJ's role, beyond the ability to rule on cases only if referred by the Northern Irish Courts.

They said the ECJ is the "crux" of the dispute with the European Union, and an agreement acceptable to the DUP would be essential for any solution to be found.

"This is about sovereignty and the constitution", the source added.

Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris is expected to give a statement in the House of Commons on the issue tomorrow.

According to the Times, the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced last month but was pulled at the last minute.

One source told the paper that Brussels was concerned Mr Sunak could not sell the complete package to the DUP and Brexiteers in his own party.

The customs agreement is understood to largely be based around a system of green and red lanes, with goods destined for Northern Ireland allowed in without routine checks.

Meanwhile, goods for export to the Republic of Ireland would undergo customs checks in Northern Irish ports.

The Government has stepped up its efforts to resolve issues with the Protocol in recent months, which have been ongoing since October 2021.

There has been no functioning devolved Government at Stormont since February 2022, with the DUP demanding fundamental change to the Protocol before it considers a return to the assembly.

The party has laid out seven tests that any deal on the protocol much meet in order for the party to end the stalemate.

The insider said there is no chance that DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson would budge on the seven tests, saying that to do so would be "electoral suicide".

Mr Donaldson has described the Protocol as being the "greatest ever threat to the economic integrity of the United Kingdom".
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...c2cc6593d9c187

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

British Finance Minister Jeremy Hunt responded to the IMF forecast: “Short-term challenges should not obscure our long-term prospects. The UK outperformed many forecasts last year, and if we stick to our plan to halve inflation, the UK is still predicted to grow faster than Germany and Japan over the coming years.”

That was the Brexit plan BEFORE Corona and Ukraine war struck.

[Jimbuna]

He's the only Tory minister I have any time for.

[Jimbuna]

Dominic Raab bullying probe another ticking time bomb under PM

Days after the prime minister sacked his party chairman, another staffing time bomb is ticking under his government.

Ministers tell us privately they expect Rishi Sunak's deputy, Dominic Raab, to be the next senior figure to be shown the door by the prime minister.

But there is also a growing focus on what the prime minister knew when he appointed Mr Raab as his deputy.

Downing Street has repeatedly said Mr Sunak was not aware of formal complaints. There is no denial that informal issues were raised.

We've been told by well-placed sources that it was an open secret that there were concerns about Mr Raab's conduct.

One figure, familiar with the situation in a department in which Mr Raab worked, said simply: "Everyone knew".

A minister added: "Everyone in Westminster, I mean everyone, has known about this for ages. It's no secret. And anyone who says they haven't has chosen not to listen."

This person concluded: "He should have gone ages ago."

A former cabinet minister told us there was a palpable sense of dread in one department when Mr Raab took over under a previous administration.

It raises the question of how much Mr Sunak ought to have known at the point he appointed Mr Raab last October.

The prime minister has always insisted, as he did here under repeated questioning in a BBC interview in November, that he didn't know of any "formal" complaints about Mr Raab when he appointed him his deputy.

Following the BBC interview, a series of formal complaints were made, after Mr Sunak publicly encouraged them to be, and the inquiry by the KC Adam Tolley was set up.

Mr Raab is now the subject of eight formal complaints. The trade union the First Division Association, which represents civil servants, has said it understands dozens of people are involved in those complaints.

These span several years and a number of government departments.

Team Raab says he wants to make his case and will see this process through, playing down suggestions he might fall on his sword.

But there's a second problem for Mr Sunak and Mr Raab: The extent of the complaints which have been made.

One serving minister told the BBC the prime minister will find it hard to keep Mr Raab in his job, when an inquiry into his behaviour reports.

The minister said it was hard to ignore the number of people who had complained about the deputy prime minister's conduct.

The inquiry, which is speaking to witnesses right now, means people, including those with the strongest views and most arresting personal experiences of working with Mr Raab, are very reluctant to talk publicly about it.

But we wanted to share with you what people who have worked for Mr Raab, serve alongside him in government and in the Conservative Party are saying to us privately.

And explore why it is that the prime minister appears to have a persistent human resources problem: A party chairman sacked, a loyal supporter in Sir Gavin Williamson, a former minister, resigning over bullying allegations he said he refuted, and now this.

Mr Raab has told the BBC he is confident he has "behaved professionally throughout" but made "no apologies for having high standards".

His allies insist he is "cracking on with the day job".

Mr Raab was the most loyal ally during Mr Sunak's first - and doomed - attempt to become prime minister.

Was Mr Sunak blinded by a desire to repay Mr Raab's loyalty? Or is it right that he puts real weight on formal complaints, rather than the ever vibrant currency of Westminster gossip?

The simple truth is that after a few weeks of Nadhim Zahawi's fate being the government's oxygen snatcher, the fate of Mr Raab has now taken its place.

And that is prompting irritation.

"There isn't much sympathy for him, but due process must be followed," a senior minister says.

That due process is likely to last a few more weeks yet.

"I've never seen this side to his personality. He's always been courteous to me," another minister reflects before adding "while I am surprised by it, it clearly can't be ignored, given the alleged scale of it."

Many are also privately pondering how different this investigation is compared to the one into Mr Zahawi, which took less than a week.

That was about establishing a paper trail, or the lack of one, about how much, or little, he'd told various bosses about his tax affairs.

The inquiry into Mr Raab rests much more on how behaviour is perceived.

One figure who would like to see the back of Mr Raab fears it is a big leap from someone who might be difficult to work with to bullying.

Others are more confident.

"Bullying is going to be the next Me Too," one Conservative MP says, in reference to the widespread and worldwide revelations of sexual harassment in recent years.

"It's going to be massive. And all this has such an inevitability about it."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64492026

[Jimbuna]

Liz Truss: I was never given realistic chance to enact tax cuts

By Jasmine Andersson
BBC News

Liz Truss has said she was never given a "realistic chance" to implement her radical tax-cutting agenda by her party.

In a 4,000-word essay in the Sunday Telegraph, Ms Truss stood by her plans to boost economic growth, arguing they were brought down by "the left-wing economic establishment".

They are the first public comments the ex-PM has made on her resignation.

But she said she was not "blameless" for the unravelling of the mini-budget.

Business Secretary Grant Shapps, who was appointed by Ms Truss as her home secretary during her final week in office, said she "clearly" had not had the right approach to taxation.

Speaking on BBC One's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show, he said her desire for lower taxes in the long term was correct, but inflation should have have been lowered first.

Ms Truss was forced to quit after she and her chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng's £45bn package of tax cuts panicked the markets and tanked the pound to a record low.

Her brief time in power - 49 days - made her the shortest-serving prime minister in UK history.

Ms Truss said that while her experience last autumn was "bruising for me personally", she believed that over the medium term her policies would have increased growth and therefore brought down debt.

She argued that the government was made a "scapegoat" for developments that had been brewing for some time.

"Frankly, we were also pushing water uphill. Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted leftward," she wrote.

"Regrettably, the government became a useful scapegoat for problems that had been brewing over a number of months."

She also said she had not appreciated the strength of the resistance she would face to her plans - including plans to abolish the 45p top rate of income tax.

"I assumed upon entering Downing Street that my mandate would be respected and accepted. How wrong I was. While I anticipated resistance to my programme from the system, I underestimated the extent of it," she writes.

Mr Kwarteng dropped the 45p income tax proposals 10 days after they were announced, telling the BBC it was "a massive distraction on what was a strong package".

Less than a fortnight later, Ms Truss sacked Mr Kwarteng, something she said she was "deeply disturbed by".

"Kwasi Kwarteng had put together a brave package that was genuinely transformative - he is an original thinker and a great advocate for Conservative ideas. But at this point, it was clear that the policy agenda could not survive and my priority had to be avoiding a serious meltdown for the UK," she wrote.

With the benefit of hindsight, she writes that she would have acted differently during her premiership - but she still backs her plans for growth.

"I have lost track of how many people have written to me or approached me since leaving Downing Street to say that they believe my diagnosis of the problems causing our country's economic lethargy was correct and that they shared my enthusiasm for the solutions I was proposing," she said.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64527252

[Jimbuna]

Tory civil war erupts as Sunak considers plan to end Strasbourg court's jurisdiction in UK

A Tory civil war has erupted after it emerged that the Prime Minister is considering withdrawing from the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) to prevent foreign judges in a Strasbourg court from vetoing British laws. The proposal has been welcomed by many on the right of the party who think it will allow the UK to finally end the migrant crisis, but liberal Conservatives have also threatened to rebel.

Express.co.uk, was told that Suella Braverman accepted the appointment of Home Secretary on the condition that she could "do what was necessary" to tackle the illegal migration crisis which saw 45,000 cross the Channel on small boats last year.

As a former Attorney General, she has been a proponent of ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, especially after an unidetified judge blocked the policy to deport illegal migrants to Rwanda.

According to the Sunday Times, a source close to Mr Sunak said: "If this legislation gets onto the statute book and is found to be lawful by our domestic courts, but it is still being held up in Strasbourg, then we know the problem is not our legislation or our courts. If that's the case, then of course he will be willing to reconsider whether being part of the ECHR is in the U.K.'s long-term interests."

But Tories on the left of the party have vented their fury at the suggestion.

In one Whatsapp group, Thurrock MP Jackie Doyle-Price, a former civil servant, reportedly told colleagues that the government should stop "willy waving" .

According to Politico, she added that if it wants to pick a fight with the ECHR, "it can do it without me."

In a message in the Home Group of Tory MPs, she declared: "I have been a member of the Conservative Party for 36 years. This group leaves me cold. Upholding the law should never be a matter for debate for a Conservative. Our Home Office is crap. If the government wants to have a phone[y] war over the ECHR instead of sorting itself out it can do it without me."

Ruislip MP David Simmonds claimed that "the ECHR is not the issue here. By pretending it is, we are setting ourselves up for a fall as a UK court will take the same line."

Alicia Kearns, chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs select Committee, added: "We cannot tackle asylum claims when we haven't given ourselves the legal grounding on coming here illegally."

Southend West MP Anna Firth claimed Doyle-Price was "bang on the money" about the ECHR "rabbit hole."

But the move has been welcomed by members of the Common Sense Group and many Brexiteers who believe Brexit cannot be completed until the UK withdraws from the ECHR.

Stoke North MP Jonathan Gullis, who has proposed the government putting down legislation to allow it to ignore decisions by the ECHR, told express.co.uk: "Let's hope he [the Prime Minister] is brave enough to do so."

Bassetlaw MP Brendan Clarke-Smith said: "The main thing for me is to stop the boats. If they can do that without leaving the ECHR then fine, but if not then it needs doing regardless. We also can't afford to sit around waiting for courts and endless appeals."

Another Red Wall MP strongly supported the idea of leaving the ECHR admitted to being a "doubting Thomas" over whether Mr Sunak would go through with the necessary changes.

Meanwhile members of the influential rightwing Common Sense Group have been in talks with the Government to bring forward the Immigration Bill to allow for the rapid deportation of illegal migrants.

It is hoped that the Bill will be published this week ahead of recess next week.

A senior member of the group told express.co.uk: "The government needs to get on the front foot with this issue and push through the legislation as quickly as possible. We cannot have any more delays.

"We are hopeful that the measures in the Bill will be quite tough in tackling this issue."
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...bfa00d3297eaf4

[Jimbuna]

Boris Johnson nears £5m in earnings since leaving office

Boris Johnson has registered an advance payment of nearly £2.5m for speaking events, in his latest declaration of outside earnings.

It brings the former prime minister's declared income since leaving office last September to almost £4.8m.

He has previously recorded nearly £1.8m in speaking fees since his departure.

Mr Johnson has also registered a further £13,500 in accommodation from JCB boss Lord Bamford and his wife Carole for January and February.

It brings the total value of accommodation he has registered from the couple for him and his family since leaving Downing Street to £74,000.

The nearly £2.5m advance in his latest declaration is from the New York-based Harry Walker speaking agency, for an unspecified number of speeches.

It comes on top of almost £1.8m he has registered since leaving office for nine speeches delivered in the US, India, Portugal, the UK and Singapore.

As well as a £510,000 advance for his political memoirs from publisher HarperCollins, he has also declared £1,943 since leaving No 10 in royalty payments for previously written books.

Under ministerial rules, former ministers are not allowed to take jobs that involve influencing government for two years after leaving their post.

But Mr Johnson's latest declarations are the latest demonstration of how much former leaders can earn shortly after leaving office through book deals and on the lucrative speaking circuit.

The £4.8m in earnings that Mr Johnson has declared since leaving No 10 just over five months ago is more than 50 times his yearly £84,144 MP salary.

A company set up to support his activities as a former PM has also received £1m from crypto currency investor Christopher Harborne.

Mr Harborne has previously donated more than £15m to the Conservatives, the Brexit Party, and Reform UK.

Mr Johnson was forced to resign by his ministers last July after a series of controversies prompted a mass walk-out among his ministers.

He attempted a comeback after his successor, Liz Truss, quit within weeks of taking office last September.

But despite obtaining enough support from Tory MPs to run in the contest to replace her, he ultimately stood aside, clearing the way for Rishi Sunak to become prime minister in October.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64569598

[Catfish]

This is actually very good, the more money he gets the less bribable he will be

I also heard Liz Truss is back, with a long excerpt in the media how nothing was her fault during her reign.
Sure not all was, she had to deal with some of the brexit fallout as well as the pandemic, but what a way to "come back".

[Jimbuna]

The UK narrowly avoided falling into recession in 2022, new figures show, after the economy saw zero growth between October and December.

This is despite a sharp 0.5% fall in economic output during December, partly due to strike action, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt said the figures showed "underlying resilience" but said "we are not out of the woods".

The Bank of England still expects the UK to enter recession this year.

But it will be shorter and less severe than previously thought.

Mr Hunt said that high inflation remains a problem and continues to cause "pain for families up and down the country".

Inflation - or the rate at which prices are rising - is slowing but at 10.5% remains close to a 40-year high.

The Bank of England has been putting up interest rates in a bid to tackle the soaring cost of living.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64584295

[Gorpet]

Originally Posted by Catfish

This is actually very good, the more money he gets the less bribable he will be

I also heard Liz Truss is back, with a long excerpt in the media how nothing was her fault during her reign.
Sure not all was, she had to deal with some of the brexit fallout as well as the pandemic, but what a way to "come back".

How so is that? Oh that's right let's not look at those we believe in.The more money they get the less bribale they are. Elect me bribe me and we will make a future together.Somewhere way south of and away from the Americans,British,Russians,Ukraines and the EU it might be cold.

[Jimbuna]

UK pays EU £1.7bn to settle long-running import fraud case

The UK has announced it will pay the European Commission a further £1.7bn (€1.9bn) to settle a long-running dispute with the EU over import fraud.

In 2018, the commission sued the UK for €2.7bn, on the grounds the UK had failed to pass on the correct amount of tax for imports between 2011 and 2017.

In March 2022, EU judges largely ruled against the UK in the case.

The Treasury acknowledged the money was a "substantial sum" but argued it would "draw a line" under the case.

In a written statement to Parliament minister John Glen also said the government wanted to avoid building up a larger bill through "further protracted legal proceedings".

In a statement, the European Commission said the UK had now paid "all amounts due" from the court case, and it was taking steps to formally wind up the dispute.

The £1.7bn figure follows a £583m payment to the EU last June, and brings the total cost of the dispute to the UK to £2.3bn.

The UK officially exited the EU's legal system in January 2021, however, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) retains the power to make rulings in cases relating to how the UK applied EU law before Brexit.

In 2018, the UK was accused of taking inadequate steps to prevent fraud after it was warned about the problem by the EU's watchdog, Olaf, in 2017.

An investigation by Olaf found that the UK was a "significant hub" for fraud, whereby organised crime groups used fake invoices to undervalue goods like textiles and footwear being imported from China - many of which were destined for the black market in other parts of the EU.

In its judgement, the ECJ found the UK had done too little to prevent fraud on imports, and had not given enough information to the commission.

It ruled that the undervaluation of imports meant the UK had not passed on the correct share of import taxes or VAT payments.

As an EU member at the time, the UK was obliged to make the payments to the Brussels-based body as part of its contribution to the EU budget.

The UK disputed the amount owed, arguing that the method used by Olaf to calculate the underpayments was not appropriate.

The EU judges upheld the commission's claim in March 2022, although it rejected how it calculated the final figure.

Mr Glen said: "Whilst the UK has now left the European Union and this is a legacy matter from before our departure, the government is keen to resolve this long-running case once and for all."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64587483