A Labour MP has warned antisemitism is rife even at junior level in football, with reports of seven-year-old Jewish players being hissed at by their opponents as a way to replicate the noise of the gas chambers.
Christian Wakeford urged the government to do “much more” to ensure that British football players can play their “beautiful game” without being subjected to unacceptable abuse.
Speaking during a Westminster Hall debate on antisemitism and other forms of racism in football, the Bury South MP warned there are examples of antisemitism everywhere in football, even at junior level.
Conservative former cabinet minister Theresa Villiers, who led the debate, said the idea of people making hissing noises at seven-year-old Jewish footballers is “just revolting” and “profoundly disturbing”.
She insisted it is a “real illustration that antisemitism remains a serious problem in football”.
Culture minister Nigel Huddleston acknowledged there is “still more to do” but assured MPs the government is committed to continue to work with football authorities to “combat racism, discrimination and antisemitism both in person and online, from grassroots to the boardroom”.
Updated
The SNP’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford should “get some proper HR advice” to understand what went wrong in the handling of a complaint against Patrick Grady, one of his MPs said.
The Glasgow North MP was suspended from the Commons for two days and the SNP for a week after an independent investigation found he had acted inappropriately towards a member of party staff in 2016.
Grady apologised in the Commons over the incident, which the report said happened while he was under the influence of alcohol.
But a recording that surfaced on Friday of an SNP group meeting drew criticism for the leader, who could be heard saying Grady deserved the group’s support upon his return, despite the complainer saying his life had been made a “living hell” and he had not been supported through the process.
The man who complained, who still works for the party, said he was considering legal action against the SNP.
In a response to the leaked recording, Blackford said he “deeply regrets that a member of staff was subject to inappropriate behaviour”.
He added that he was initiating an external review of “support available to staff, to sit alongside the independent advice service and independent complaints process”.
Joanna Cherry, SNP MP for Edinburgh South West, called for Blackford to ensure he took “proper HR advice” on Thursday, after repeating claims that the party had issues in dealing with complaints.
Updated
Sajid Javid has said NHS workers deserve “fair” pay in the face of soaring prices.
The health secretary told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “Of course, part of showing the value we attach to whether it’s nurses or other health workers is, of course it is pay and so along with the thanks we’ve got to make sure that we are fair in pay.
“And that is why for example last year, whilst there was a freeze on all public sector pay, there was no freeze on NHS pay; it went up by 3% despite the challenges at the time.
Now this year’s pay rise, I can’t tell you right now what it’s going to be but what I can tell you is that we will listen carefully to the independent pay review body, which by the way, rightly also, as well as inflation, takes into account retention and many other sensible factors.
“And it will report back to me as Secretary of State, we will take that into account and we will respond.”
Johnson to hold talks with Prince of Wales over Rwanda policy
Boris Johnson will hold talks with the Prince of Wales in Rwanda after the latter’s reported criticism of the policy of sending asylum seekers to the country on a one-way ticket.
The prime minister will join Charles on Thursday in the east African country’s capital Kigali, where they are attending the Commonwealth heads of government meeting (Chogm).
The meeting between the prime minister and Charles will be the first time they have spoken since the service for the Queen’s platinum jubilee.
It was subsequently reported that Charles has described the policy of sending asylum seekers who arrive in the UK after unauthorised journeys as “appalling” in private remarks.
“They are due to meet, obviously they will encounter each other during the summit but they are due to have a bilateral discussion as well,” the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said.
The first flight removing people to Rwanda was due to take off last week but was grounded by successful legal challenges ahead of a full hearing on the scheme’s legality in UK courts.
Updated
During today’s Scottish parliament debate on cost of living support, public finance minister Tom Arthur announced plans to look at ways of recouping money from owners of second homes and empty homes who have received the £400 payment from the UK government’s energy bills support scheme.
Arthur said: “In this cost of living crisis, it is vital resources are directed at those who need it most, so it is clearly wrong that second home owners or those who own long term empty homes benefit from a second £400 energy rebate.
“The Scottish government will work with COSLA and local government to examine how to recover this money, including through a council tax levy.
“We will also work them to examine how to use the funds raised to support local cost of living responses on a fair and equitable basis across Scotland.”
Updated
Labour has accused the Conservatives of not being fully up-front with pensioners as the government today appeared to add a “get-out clause” to the triple lock policy.
Thérèse Coffey, secretary of state for work and pensions said in March “yes, I do make that commitment” when asked about whether the state pension will rise by the Triple Lock for the remainder of this parliament.
The chancellor Rishi Sunak also committed to the triple lock in his cost of living statement earlier this month.
However, during a debate in the House of Commons today, Coffey said she “cannot make any declaration about the rises in benefits […] and that is because I am required by law to undertake a review of the benefits once a year”.
Jonathan Ashworth MP, Labour’s shadow work and pensions secretary, had asked the secretary of state whether she would “resile from her position to uprate pensions and benefits in line with September’s inflation”.
Updated
The chairman of the justice select committee has expressed concerns over “restrictions” on the way parliament is able to interpret cases in the government’s plan for a British bill of rights.
Conservative MP Sir Bob Neill told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme that “some change” to the Human Rights Act “is appropriate”.
He said: “There are some sensible things in it. Having a filter process in our UK legislation to prevent unmeritorious claims getting off the ground at a very early stage is sensible.
“When those cases eventually get to Strasbourg, there is no reason why we shouldn’t do it earlier on.
“And I think, you know, protecting the public, making sure that’s there is sensible, but I do have concerns about undue restrictions on the way in which parliament is able to interpret cases on an individual basis.”
Updated
Shapps says claim he wrecked strike negotiations 'a total lie'
Transport secretary Grant Shapps has accused Mick Lynch of “wasting time making false claims in the media” after the union boss accused him of wrecking negotiations.
He said in a statement: “This is a total lie from the RMT and its general secretary. I have had absolutely nothing to do with either the issuing of a letter from Network Rail, the employer, to the RMT - or any request to withdraw it.
“I understand that the letter makes no mention of 2,900 redundancies, but I do know it confirmed Network Rail would be introducing desperately needed reforms for the industry after the union chose strike action instead of further talks.
“The RMT continues to deflect from the fact that the only people responsible for the massive public disruption this week is them.
“I want to urge Mick Lynch and his members to stop wasting time making false claims in the media and instead return to the negotiating table so an agreement can be reached.”
Updated
Sir Keir is understood to be waiting until the end of the industrial action before instructing chief whip Alan Campbell to deal with any disciplinary issues relating to the strike, PA reports.
Following PMQs, a Labour spokesman said Campbell would make a decision in the “next few days”.
He would not be drawn on what form any action might take, but said “the chief whip is aware of Keir’s wishes”.
“I think the right way is for the process to go ahead as it should, and that is for the chief whip to speak to the individuals concerned,” he added.
Updated
Afternoon summary
Three-day court hearing set for July to decide if Rwanda deportation policy lawful
A three-day high court hearing has been agreed to determine whether the Home Office’s controversial plans to remove some asylum seekers to Rwanda is lawful. The hearing will take start on 19 July, a high court judge confirmed today.
Representatives for those involved in the case urged the judge, Mr Justice Swift, to delay the hearing to allow more time for evidence to be gathered and to allocate more than three days for the hearing. He refused.
The Home Office is hoping to get the European Court of Human Rights to change its mind about an interim ruling against a decision which led to the grounding of the inaugural flight to Rwanda last week.
In written submissions to the high court this week about the Rwanda deportation case the home secretary wrote: “The UK has informed the ECtHR that it intends to submit representations imminently.”
However, ECtHR told the Guardian that certain criteria would need to be met before a ruling of the kind made last week could be set aside. These issues are unlikely to be resolved before the full high court hearing next month which will examine the lawfulness of Home Office’s plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
“An interim measure would usually only be lifted if the court was satisfied that there was no imminent risk of irreparable harm to the applicant. That test would normally be satisfied in an expulsion case if either there was no imminent risk of expulsion, or if the court was satisfied that if expelled, there would no longer be a real risk of irreparable harm,” a spokesperson for ECtHR said.
Updated
Lawyers have now had time to read the text of the bill of rights bill. Here is the start of a thread by Mark Elliott, professor of public law at Cambridge University.
The Bill of Rights Bill has just been published.
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
I'll tweet some thoughts as I read through it... https://t.co/eGoeTplDDU
/1 pic.twitter.com/fcHlQIlquV
And here are his conclusions.
To conclude (I'll do a blogpost setting out these thoughts in more detail): the Bill of Rights seems to me significantly to weaken the scope for domestic protection of ECHR rights. /27
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
The overall strategy appears to be to marginalise the influence of the ECtHR while reducing domestic courts' scope to uphold Convention rights. /28
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
Domestic courts' powers are limited in a variety of ways, including the abolition of the s 3 HRA interpretive obligation/power; micro-management of how Convention rights are interpreted; and several provisions that explicitly limit domestic courts' powers. /29
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
The key point is that *nothing* in the Bill of Rights changes the position in international law. The UK's binding treaty obligations as a State Party to the ECHR will remain *exactly the same*. /30
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
This means that while individuals in the UK will be less able to obtain relief in UK courts, things that were breaches of Convention rights before the Bill of Rights will *still* be breaches of Convention rights *under* the Bill of Rights. /31
— Mark Elliott (@ProfMarkElliott) June 22, 2022
Here is the start of a thread on the same topic by David Allen Green, the lawyer and legal commentator.
The new "Bill of Rights"
— davidallengreen (@davidallengreen) June 22, 2022
- a brief thread about how the Bill is fundamentally different from the Human Rights Act 1998
And here are two of his conclusions.
This is thereby not so much a repeal of the Human Rights Act, but a re-enactment of it - but with a new title
— davidallengreen (@davidallengreen) June 22, 2022
The portentous "Bill of Rights" pic.twitter.com/QZxXG3sKEs
The rest of the Bill has many provisions to make it harder for those rights to be enforceable in practical situations
— davidallengreen (@davidallengreen) June 22, 2022
Odd of a "Bill of Rights" if you think about it
But none of those provisions affect the core of the bill
Which is *identical* to the Human Rights Act
Rees-Mogg dismisses report setting out economic cost of Brexit as 'regurgitation of Project Fear'
As the i’s Paul Waugh reports, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexit opportunities minister, has dismissed a report from the Resolution Foundation today setting out the damage that Brexit has done to the economy as a “regurgitation of Project Fear”.
.@Jacob_Rees_Mogg just let rip at today's @resfoundation LSE report (which said real pay set to be £470 per worker lower each yr because of Brexit)
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) June 22, 2022
A "regurgitation of Project Fear by all the usual suspects" + similar projections turned out to be "bilge"https://t.co/5ERWHccStn
Rees-Mogg added the biggest economic benefit of Brexit was UK's faster vaccine which pumped "billions into the economy".
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) June 22, 2022
Asked re @resfoundation report finding that Brexit has cut UK productivity by 1.3%, JRM replied: "We are not providing economic forecasts on productivity"
Rees-Mogg: most reports on economic impact of Brexit were based on "counterfactuals" which are impossible to be sure about.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) June 22, 2022
Stressed the "overwhelming" case for Brexit for him was "democracy".
"The case about whether it makes you more prosperous" was a secondary issue.
The Resolution Foundation report is here. And here is our story about its conclusions.
MPs have formally approved moves to allow the UK government to directly commission abortion services in Northern Ireland, PA Media reports. PA says:
The House of Commons voted 215 to 70, majority 145, in favour of the Abortion (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2022.
Abortion legislation in Northern Ireland was liberalised in 2019 following laws passed by Westminster at a time when the power-sharing government at Stormont had collapsed.
But while individual health trusts in Northern Ireland currently offer services on an ad-hoc basis, the Department of Health has yet to centrally commission the services due to a political impasse at Stormont on the issue.
The DUP, which is opposed to abortion, had refused to agree to the issue being tabled on the agenda of the ministerial executive.
The government laid regulations at parliament last month that removed the need for the Department of Health to seek the approval of the wider executive to commission the services.
They have now been approved by MPs and peers.
The division list shows that 61 Tories, all eight DUP MPs and one Labour MP voted against the regulations.
Updated
Returning UK's stockpile of weapons to pre-Ukraine levels could take several years, peers told
Returning the UK’s stockpile of weapons to pre-Ukraine war levels could take years, the head of the armed forces has said.
Giving evidence to the Lords international relations and defence committee, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, who took over as chief of the defence staff in November 2021, said even replacing less sophisticated weapons sent to Ukraine could take “several years” due to constraints on the UK’s industrial capacity.
As PA Media reports, the UK has provided a wide range of weapons to Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February, including anti-tank rocket launchers, armoured vehicles, anti-aircraft systems and Brimstone missiles. But replacing those weapons has become a concern for some in parliament.
Radakin told the committee that the “rate of expenditure” of weapons in Ukraine and the “industrial capacity to backfill” had already become “a significant issue”. Increased demand for weapons, both in the UK and Europe, along with Britain’s decline in industrial capacity over recent decades and current supply chain problems have added to those issues.
Radakin said the government needed to work with defence suppliers, and had already invited 12 leading companies to Downing Street for talks. But he added:
We are then talking in years, because you cannot whistle up with modern weapons a quick production line.
Yes, you can churn out shells and artillery, but even at the not super-sophisticated end, even at the modest end of an NLAW [anti-tank] weapon, then that’s going to take several years to get back to our original stocks.
Nine in every 10 people who were refused asylum by the Home Office two years ago were free to remain in the country, an analysis has found. As my colleague Rajeev Syal reports, the disclosure has fuelled claims that Priti Patel’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is failing to address fundamental problems in the asylum system such as removals.
Rajeev’s story is here.
The bill of rights bill announced by Dominic Raab earlier is now available on parliament’s website.
And all the associated papers, including the explanatory notes, are here.
Labour dismisses Rees-Mogg's retained EU law dashboard as 'vanity project' that won't help with cost of living crisis
In response to Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Commons statement about his new retained EU law dashboard, Stephen Doughty, the shadow Foreign Office minister, accused him of purusing a “vanity project”. Doughty told MPs:
This simply appears to be a vanity project.
It’s quite extraordinary that on the day that inflation tops 9%, the cost of energy is soaring, families facing massive pressures wondering how they’ll put food on the table, prices rising at the fastest rate of increase for 40 years, the government’s offer today to the British people is a digital filing cabinet of existing legislation ...
The reality is that gimmicks do nothing to address the real challenges that the public face today. And for all the government’s talk about changes we can make outside the EU, they still refuse to make the one concrete change that the Labour party has been demanding for months, with the overwhelming support of the British people, as promised by the prime minister himself, which is the removal of VAT on home energy bills.
No 10 says increasing public sector pay in line with inflation would be 'reckless'
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson said that to raise public sector pay in line with inflation – as the National Education Union is demanding for teachers (see 10.37am) - would be “reckless”.
As the Mirror reports, asked to explain why a pay rise in line with inflation would be reckless, the spokesperson replied:
It involves chasing inflation with wages, so that you end up having a knock-on impact of pushing inflation ever higher and therefore means the pay people do take home is worth less.
The spokesperson also gave a more developed answer than was available yesterday as to why it was right for the government to increase state pensions next year by about 10%, but not salaries for public sector workers. (See 9.23am.) The spokesperson said:
I’m not going to jump ahead to what it will or won’t be next year in terms of pensions. Most commentators recognise that the primary risk from current high levels of inflation that becomes embedded through the labour market, and through wages, there’s not the same risk of this spillover effect to private sector wages from any increase to the state pension.
Asked if the prime minister was worried about fuelling intergenerational resentment, he said:
We will keep explaining to the public why we think this is the right approach, and we are confident that the public will understand that it would long term have a bigger impact on their take-home pay if we were to take actions – reckless actions – now that could spike inflation.
It’s important to stress that does not mean we do not want to reward public sector workers with a pay rise, we do, it’s just we must make sure that we don’t do anything that has a knock-on impact which feeds into this global inflationary spiral that there is the potential to see.
Updated
Rees-Mogg's retained EU law dashboard announcement - snap verdict
During the 2016 referendum campaign Brexiters were often asked to identify EU regulations that they wanted to abolish if Britain left the EU. Often campaigners found it hard to give a credible answer, and on at least one occasion Boris Johnson himself – who ought to have been better briefed on these matters than most other people – came unstuck when he blamed Brussels for smoked kipper regulations that originated in the UK.
While the Brexiters were successful in convincing many people that free movement was a problem, on EU “red tape” and regulation, by and large they failed to make a compelling case.
But they have not given up trying. When Jacob Rees-Mogg was appointed to his current job in February, he was given the title “minister for Brexit opportunities” so that he could devote himself to identifying the offending EU red tape left clogging up the statute book.
One of his first moves was to launch a public consultation on what regulations could be abolished. The initiative was mocked, because it suggested that Rees-Mogg did not have much of a clue himself as to what needed to go.
Four months on, he still does not seem to have much of an agenda. Today’s announcement essentially just repeats his Sun article, with the addition of a website.
Earlier this month my colleague Aubrey Allegretti reported that Rees-Mogg wanted to be able to announce what would effectively be a four-year sunset clause, after which all retained EU law would lapse. Other cabinet ministers considered this “impossible”, and the proposal was noticeably absent from today’s statement.
Rees-Mogg also had almost nothing to say about what leftover EU regulations might be surplus to requirements. About the only specific one he referred to was one relating to “the power of vacuum cleaners”, which he suggested was not a matter that should “trouble Her Majesty’s government”.
My colleague Peter Walker thinks this is reminiscent of one of the most derided initiatives of the John Major administration.
A gov dot uk "dashboard" allowing the public to "count down" the amount of retained EU law being abolished post-Brexit, as just announced by Jacob Rees-Mogg in the Commons, has very strong "cones hotline" vibes to it.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) June 22, 2022
Updated
The retained EU law dashboard is now live. You can read it here.
And here is an explanation for what it does.
Updated
In his statement, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexit opportunities minister, also confirmed that the government would bring forward a Brexit freedoms bill that would make it easier for retained EU law to be repealed.
Updated
Rees-Mogg claims new online dashboard will help public nominate retained EU laws that could be scrapped
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the minister for Brexit opportunities, is making his Commons statement now.
He says Brexit was never an end in itself, but a means by which the UK could achieve great things.
He says the goverment wants the country to be the most sensibly regulated country in the world.
Lord Frost, his predecessor, launched a review into retained EU law, he says.
Rees-Mogg says not all Brexit freedoms can be grasped at once.
He says the public has great interest in what laws can be repealed. He says he is grateful to the readers of the Sun and Daily Express for the many suggestions they sent in.
The government is today launching a dashboard with details of more than 2,400 retained EU laws, covering more than 300 policy areas, he says.
He says the dashboard will keep a tally as retained laws are removed.
He says he is again inviting the public to share their ideas as to what EU retained laws should be retained, amended or repealed.
He describes his dashboard as “the supply side reformer’s El Dorado”.
And he also says it is good that the UK left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers firms should use. That is a typically short-sighted EU law that will reduce innovation, he claims.
(The EU decision to force all mobile phones to use a standard charger has been welcomed by consumers, although Rees-Mogg has probably been reading the Economist’s Charlemagne column saying it is a bad idea.)
Jonathan Gullis (Con) says that when he saw the deportation flight to Rwanda being halted he was so frustrated he said the UK should withdraw from the European convention of human rights. But he says he wants to say now that he was wrong. Having engaged with Dominic Raab, he now accepts that the principle set out in the bill of rights bill is a better way of dealing with the problem.
In fact, Gullis withdrew his call for the UK to leave the convention within about an hour of his making it on social media late at night on social media last week. Gullis reportedly had a rethink after recalling that the ECHR is an integral part of the Good Friday agreement, which the government supports. Gullis is parliamentary private secretary to the Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis, and presumably should have realised this in the first place.
Updated
Richard Graham (Con) asks why Raab wants to stop injunctions from the European court of human rights applying in the UK. Wouldn’t it be better to try winning these cases instead? And isn’t that against international laws?
Raab says the use of injunctions is a procedural matter. It is not part of the convention, he says. He says this is an example of how the court has tried to expand its role.
Starmer accuses Johnson of failing to do anything to prevent rail strikes
Here is the PA Media story about the Johnson/Starmer exchanges at PMQs.
Boris Johnson was accused of failing to lift a finger to prevent the rail strikes which have caused travel chaos.
Labour leader Keir Starmer said the prime minister and transport secretary Grant Shapps had refused to meet the unions representing rail workers ahead of this week’s industrial action.
But Johnson hit out at Starmer, saying it was a “disgrace” that Labour MPs had joined RMT members on the picket lines outside train stations.
“What we have got to do is modernise our railways,” Johnson told the Labour leader.
“It is a disgrace, when we are planning to make sure that you don’t have ticket offices that sell fewer than one ticket per hour, that he yesterday had 25 Labour MPs out on the picket lines.”
Johnson said Labour was “backing the strikers while we back the strivers”.
Starmer shot back: “The prime minister of this country and his transport secretary haven’t attended a single meeting, held a conversation or lifted a finger to stop these strikes.”
But he said on Monday they found time to attend a “lavish ball” to raise funds for the Tory party, where a donor has paid £120,000 to have a joint dinner with Johnson and predecessors Theresa May and David Cameron.
“If there is money coming his way, he is there,” Starmer said.
In the Commons Andrew Slaughter (Lab) says the legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg has described the bill as a “ragbag of restrictions” that will make people more vulnerable. Slaughter says it is a “damp squib”, and a legal nonsense.
Raab says the bill can’t be both a damp squib and a threat to people’s rights.
He says other commentators support what he is doing. He cites, as an example, the article written by Jonathan Sumption, the former supreme court judge in the Sunday Times at the weekend.
Updated
Raab claims his bill of rights bill partly inspired by principles set out in book on HRA written by Starmer in 1999
Raab is responding to Reeves.
He says the European convention on human rights is enshrined in the new bill.
Referring to Reeves’s comments about rapes, he says nothing in the bill weakens protections for victims. The bill will strengthen the position for vicitims, he claims.
And he says rape prosecutions are increasing.
He says Labour is blind to the problems with the Human Rights Act in a way that its architects are not. He says Jack Straw, home secretary when the HRA was passed, has said the HRA needs to be rebalanced. He has spoken of it being a villains’ charter, he says.
He says the model that he has followed is based on a textbook he read in 1999. It was written by an authority on the subject, and it said the role of the European court of human rights was “primarily concerned with supervision”. Its role was “subsidiary to that of domestic authorities”, Raab says. Raab says this book also said the European court had no role in domestic law unless human rights were being ignored.
Raab says someone is asking who wrote the book. It was Keir Starmer, he says. It was a seminal book on the HRA. He says Starmer was a more convincing lawyer than a politician.
UPDATE: Raab said:
I have to say, the comparison with what Russia or [Vladimir] Putin does, I’m afraid, shows a lack of moral compass on the side of those benches and not these. And then she diverted into a monologue on a very serious subject, which is in relation to rape.
Let us be absolutely crystal clear. There is absolutely nothing in this bill of rights that will do anything to weaken the protections of victims. Far from it, in relation to deportation of foreign national criminals, in relation to the release of dangerous rapists, in relation to what we do inside our prisons, this will strengthen our protection of victims and public protection.
Again, for the record, on such a serious issue on which I agree with her the importance, she might get her facts straight. The volume of rape convictions has increased by two thirds in the last year alone.
Updated
Labour claims bill of rights bill 'an attack on women' from a government that has 'effectively decriminalised rape'
Ellie Reeves, a shadow justice minister, is responding for Labour. She says Steve Reed, the shadow justice secretary, cannot be present because of the recent death of his father.
The bill is a con, she says. It is unnecessary. So why is the government going ahead with this? Because this is a government that likes to blame others for its own failings.
She says it is shameful that some Tories even want to take Britain out of the ECHR. That is “shameful” from the party of Churchill, she says.
She challenges Raab to condemn his colleagues who want this.
Labour brought human rights back from Strasbourg, she says. The Human Rights Act is admired around the world. And it is effective, because British court decisions are now only rarely overturned in Strasbourg.
She says it is hypocritical of the government to defend human rights in Ukraine while snatching them away from people at home.
The Human Rights Act is held up around the world as an exemplar of modern human rights legislation, which is why the European Court very rarely overrules our judges, something that the review panel recognised in their report. It is a beacon of hope to people in countries whose basic human rights are trampled over by strong men and dictators.
And there is no better example right now than in Ukraine, where the rights of millions are being crushed under the jackboots of Vladimir Putin. What stunning hypocrisy from this government to preach to others about the importance of defending rights abroad while snatching British people’s rights away at home.
She gives examples of how the HRA has protected people’s rights. And she says the new bill is effectively an attack on women, because the HRA has protected women.
This bill of rights con isn’t just an attack on victims of crime who the state has failed to protect. It’s an attack on women. Women have used the Human Rights Act to challenge the police when they have either failed or refused to investigate rape and sexual assault cases.
It should come as no surprise that this bill has been put forward by a Conservative government that has effectively decriminalised rape. Last week’s scorecards showed pitiful progress on the record low rape convictions under this government.
The claim the government has effectively decriminalised rape provokes cries of protest from Tory MPs.
Reeves says there will be no point in women reporting rape allegations if they do not have a mechanism to enforce police to investigate.
Updated
Raab says he is proud of the supreme court. The new bill will make it clear that the court does not have to follow case law from Strasbourg.
The European court of human rights has issued “expansive” rulings, he says.
The new bill will give the UK courts from freedom to interprete laws in their own way, using the “margin of appreciation” allowed under the convention.
The bill will allow frivolous human rights claims to be thrown out at an earlier stage, he says.
And it should make it easier for foreign criminals to be deported, which will “better protect the public”.
Ultimately it will make us freer, and our streets safer.
Dominic Raab, the justice secretary and deputy PM, is speaking now.
He says rights in Britain go back to Magna Carta. They do not just date from Labour’s Human Rights Act.
He says the UK will remain a party to the European convention on human rights.
He says his plans will strengthen freedom of speech. And it will recognise the right to jury trial - “something which is not prevalent on the continent but he’s very much part of the heritage and the pedigree of this country”.
Dominic Raab's statement on bill of rights bill
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons speaker, begins with a reprimand to Dominic Raab for announcing details of the bill to the media first, and not to parliament.
He says, if Raab had not agreed to make a statement, he would have graned a UQ.
Johnson says everyone understands bullying is an appalling thing, and something that should not be tolerated. People should speak out against it, he says.
Carolyn Harris (Lab) asks the PM if he will implement a single annual payment for HRT.
Johnson says the health secretary is accelerating the work of the HRT taskforce to make sure women get the treatment they need.
From the BBC’s Chris Mason
V interesting nugget spotted by @ChristinaMcS — the Prime Minister suggesting there is no point importing coal when it available here, ‘especially metallurgical coal.’ Sounds like a heavy hint the govt might say yes to a new coal mine in Cumbria https://t.co/oa2dyt9UZe
— Chris Mason (@ChrisMasonBBC) June 22, 2022
Sir Desmond Swayne (Con) asks if the taking back control policy will apply to the European convention on human rights.
Johnson urges Swayne to wait for the statement on the bill of rights bill that is coming up shortly.
Sir George Howarth (Lab) asks the PM to condemn the policing of the Champions League final in Paris.
Johnson says claims about the behaviour of British fans at the match have been debunked.
Updated
Sir Bill Wiggin (Con) asks what the PM can be done to ensure students with exams are not punished by the train strikes.
Johnson says no exams have been cancelled. Students and colleges are meant to have contingency plans in place.
Updated
Colleen Fletcher (Lab) says Coventry is the UK centre for battery innovation. If the government wants this sector to survive, the PM needs to guarantee that the West Midlands gigafactory project will be able to go ahead?
Johnson says that is the first sensible question from Labour. He says the government does support gigafactory projects. It is working in Coventry to ensure it gets a successful result there.
Updated
Kate Osborne (Lab) asks when the PM will start supporting the working people of this country.
Johnson says if Osborne wants to support the working people of this country, she should get off the RMT picket lines. People want to see a reduction in rail costs, he says, implying the RMT are preventing this.
This is from my colleague John Crace.
From that #PMQs I’d say that Tory efforts to blame Labour for the strikes aren’t even convincing The Tories
— John Crace (@JohnJCrace) June 22, 2022
Stephen Farry (Alliance) says a majority of members of the Northern Ireland assembly reject the NI protocol bill. The government is committed to the Good Friday agreement. But Dominic Raab is about to publish a bill unpicking human rights law.
Johnson says Farry is wrong about this.
Andy Carter (Con) asks how many more police officers have been recruited since the PM came into office.
Johnson says it is more than 30,000. They are cutting neighbourhood crime, he claims.
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, asks why the UK is doing worse than other European economies.
Johnson says inflation is a global problem. He claims taxes are higher in Scotland
Blackford says today’s report from the Resolution Foundation shows how the Tories’ “disastrous Brexit” will make the UK poorer. Will the PM negotiate an economic agreement with the EU? Or will he push it into recession?
Johnson says Blackford has understimated what the UK is achieving. It is overtaking China as a venue for venture capital investment.
Starmer says there have been 15 tax rises. The government has delivered high taxes, low growth and low wages. The PM holds meetings about ending the cap on bankers’ bonuses. But he can’t find time for a meeting to end the rail strike. Members of the armed forces are facing a pay cut, he says.
Johnson says the government has increased funding for the armed forces. And eight members of the shadow cabinet want to get rid of the nuclear deterrent, he says. Energy is being reformed. A nuclear plant will be built every year. Welfare reforms have got 500,000 people into work. And the government wants to cut the cost of rail travel. Labour MPs are on the picket lines, literally holding hands with Arthur Scargill, he claims.
(It is quite telling that, to cite an unpopular and well-known union leader, Johnson has to go back to a figure from the 1970s and 1980s. Scargill is now in his 80s.)
Updated
Starmer says the PM has rolled over after being lobbied to lift the cap on bankers bonuses.
Johnson avoids the issue, and says the economy is prospering because of his policies.
Starmer says Johnson just blames everyone else. Can’t he hear the country screaming to him saying: ‘Get on with your job.’ The Treasury says every worker should have a pay cut. But the PM’s chief of staff wants to change the rules so bankers can get bigger bonuses.
Johnson says 8m of the most vulnerable households are getting £1,000. And the government wants to cut the cost of rail travel. Labour backs the strike.
Updated
Starmer says if he does need advice, about, say, a £100,000 job at the Foreign Office, he will ask the PM.
The PM has not met rail unions. But at a Tory fundraiser on Monday, he sold a meeting with himself for more than £100,000. If there is money for himself, he is there.
Johnson says the government is doing all it can to avoid the strikes. It is up to the rail management to negotiate. He says Labour won’t call out his MPs who back the striking workers because Labour takes £10m from the unions. That is the fee Starmer is receiving for the case he is failing to make.
Starmer says Johnson has not even gone to Wakefield.
And, talking of people not up to the job, Grant Shapps spends his time tracking the PM’s unpopularity on his spreadsheet instead of dealing with travel problems. How many meetings has the PM, or Shapps, had with railworkers this week to stop the strikes.
Johnson says this is the government that loves the railways. He says he built Crossrail. He will build Northern Powerhouse rail. Yesterday 25 Labour MPs were on RMT picket lines, he says. They backed the strikers, the government backs the strivers.
Updated
Keir Starmer pays tribute to “the plucky Conservative candidate in Wakefield”. He is standing even though his colleagues had a vote of no confidence in him. Does the PM have any interest in seeing if the public will vote for a Tory even his colleagues think is not up to it.
Johnson says he thinks the people of Wakefield, and of Tiverton and Honiton, would rather vote for a Conservative government. Starmer has not even the gumption to speak out against the rail strikes.
Updated
Johnson refuses to deny considering appointing his wife to government post
Chris Elmore (Lab) asks if the PM has ever considered the appointment of his current spouse to a government post, or a post with the royal household.
Johnson says the opposition do not want to talk about the economy, and the number of people in payroll employment.
Boris Johnson starts by saying it is Windrush day. A monument is being unveiled at Waterloo station. And he says he hosted a reception yesterday for armed forces week.
He also welcomes the Moderna deal. (See 11.45am.)
Later today he will be going to the Commonwealth summit in Rwanda, he says. After that he will attend the G7 and Nato summits.
From the i’s Paul Waugh
Normally on #PMQs day, Labour whip @NavPMishra can be seen behind speakers chair helping prep the troops.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) June 22, 2022
Can't see him today. Has he been told to stay away (or sacked?) for going on RMT picket line...?
PMQs
PMQs is starting soon.
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
Bill of rights bill 'lurch backwards for British justice', says Law Society
The bill of rights bill being published today shows represents “a lurch backwards for British justice”, according to the Law Society, which represents solicitors. In a statement its president, I Stephanie Boyce, said:
The erosion of accountability trumpeted by the justice secretary signals a deepening of the government’s disregard for the checks and balances that underpin the rule of law.
The bill will create an acceptable class of human rights abuses in the United Kingdom – by introducing a bar on claims deemed not to cause ‘significant disadvantage’.
It is a lurch backwards for British justice. Authorities may begin to consider some rights violations as acceptable, because these could no longer be challenged under the bill of rights despite being against the law.
Overall, the bill would grant the state greater unfettered power over the people, power which would then belong to all future governments, whatever their ideologies.
The disregard for the rule of law the government is repeatedly signalling both at home and abroad – also inherent in this bill – risks inflicting serious harm on Britain’s reputation with trade partners, business and in the international arena.
Updated
Moderna has announced that it will open a vaccine research and manufacturing centre in the UK. In a visit to mark the announcement, Sajid Javid, the health secretary, said:
We all saw during the pandemic the differences that cutting edge vaccines and treatments can make and we all particularly saw that the mRNA technology has been very transformational. It has literally saved millions of lives over the last couple of years.
And that’s why I’m thrilled to announce this new partnership between the UK government and Moderna, where Moderna will established here in the UK, a global R&D facility with over £1bn for investment in this cutting edge technology, and also a huge manufacturing centre, their largest outside of the US, and so this is a great investment in the UK, and gives huge confidence to our life sciences sector already leading in Europe.
Updated
There are two Commons statements today after PMQs, which are both likely to appeal to Brexiters. Dominic Raab, the justice secretary, will give one on the bill of rights bill being published today, and he will be followed by Jacob Rees-Mogg, the minister for Brexit opportunities, who will speak about plans to get rid of some retained EU law.
AFTER 1230 TODAY…
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) June 22, 2022
1. Statement - Bill of Rights - @DominicRaab
2. Statement - Update on Retained EU Law - @Jacob_Rees_Mogg
Rwanda deportation policy may already be having deterrent effect on small boat Channel crossings, MPs told
Matthew Rycroft, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, has told the Commons home affairs committee that it is impossible to say how many asylum seekers will need to be sent to Rwanda for the policy to have a deterrent effect.
As PA Media reports, asked to quantify the amount needing to be removed to the east African nation, in Home Office thinking, for its scheme to be successful, Rycroft replied:
Well, I don’t think there’s a single answer to that question and obviously different people have different views about success.
He said the department had done “a lot of modelling” on the number that would need to be sent away before the disincentive kicks in. Pressed on whether it would be hundreds a year, or thousands, or tens of thousands, he said:
I don’t think at this stage it’d be right to speculate about those sorts of numbers ... The one thing I would say is I don’t think the success of this scheme should be measured by the number of people being relocated to Rwanda. The success of the scheme should be measured by the number of journeys deterred.
Asked again how many need to be removed before that disincentive will work, he said: “That is impossible to answer.”
And these are from the home affairs commentator Danny Shaw, who has also been watching the hearing. He says Rycroft, who is giving evidence with Tricia Hayes, the second permanent secretary at the Home Office, told MPs that it was possible that the Rwanda policy was already having deterrent effect.
Onto Rwanda asylum policy…@MatthewRycroft1 says small boat crossings are “not rising as much as our projection for this year” but it’s “too early to tell “ if that’s due to Rwanda scheme or other factors, such as weather.
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
But @ukhomeoffice is monitoring crossing numbers. @MatthewRycroft1 says they will compare the number projected with actual figure & work out what factors contributed to the difference to determine if Rwanda asylum policy is having a deterrent effect.
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
47 single men were given removal notices for first asylum flight, @MatthewRycroft1 says. Their “starting policy” is that policy applies to men but women are “not ruled out”.
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
Tricia Hayes says @ukhomeoffice wants to avoid perverse outcomes by publicly excluding certain groups.
Ah. @MatthewRycroft1 goes further.
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
“There is already the possibility of the beginnings of some deterrent effect” of Rwanda policy cos crossing numbers lower than projected.
But too soon to say definitively & @ukhomeoffice checking if it leads to more dangerous routes used.
Here is the quote in full. Rycroft said:
There is already, possibly, the beginnings of some deterrent effect visible. The fact that the numbers [of people crossing the Channel in small boats] are higher than last year, the proportion higher is already a bit smaller since the announcement than it was before the announcement. It is too early to be definitive about that. There are all sorts of other things that could have contributed to that.
But in due course, when we’ve got the evidence, I will come back to the committee with an assessment about that evidence and then, on the basis of that, an assessment about value for money.
Permanent Secretary @MatthewRycroft1 says Rwanda policy will be a “pyrrhic victory if it created something more dangerous”. @ukhomeoffice clearly closely monitoring if there’s a switch to longer sea routes and container lorries. @CommonsHomeAffs
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
More detail on last week’s failed Rwanda flight: 47 men given removal notices. 40 successfully challenged before day of the flight. 7 were taken off on the day.
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
Tricia Hayes tells @CommonsHomeAffs @ukhomeoffice has set up a “Centre of Excellence” team to deal with Rwanda cases
On costs, @MatthewRycroft1 refuses to tell @CommonsHomeAffs what extra costs are of Rwanda policy. But he says they will be in 3 areas:
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawNews) June 22, 2022
- per person
- economic development for Rwanda
- infrastructure for Rwanda asylum scheme
He says details will be published in annual report
Updated
National Education Union threatens strike action if teachers don't get inflation-plus pay rise
The National Education Union, the biggest teaching union in the country, has written to Nadhim Zahawi, the education secretary, saying it wants “inflation-plus pay increases for all teachers” in this year’s pay round. If the government does not respond, it will ballot teachers in England on strike action in the autumn, it says.
The letter, from the NEU’s joint general secretaries, Mary Bousted and Kevin Courtney, says the government recommendation to the school teachers’ review body (STRB), which was 3%, is out of date. Quoting today’s inflation figures, Bousted and Courtney say “inflation has increased dramatically” since the 3% figure was proposed. They go on:
Alongside the decline in teacher pay in real terms against inflation, it has also declined in relative terms against earnings. Average teacher salaries are at their lowest level compared to average earnings across the economy in over 40 years.
Teachers and school leaders often tell us that workload is their predominant concern. But right now, our members are telling us pay is a big issue too.
The combination of unsustainable hours, the work intensity during those hours and ever-falling pay levels are damaging our schools and the young people we are educating.
Teachers are looking at their working hours and their pay and calculating hourly rates, which are alarmingly low.
The latest teacher training figures are very worrying; applications have fallen by 24% compared with last year.
One in eight newly qualified teachers left the job in their first year of teaching. These young people have often finished a degree, then completed a postgraduate qualification. They are a great loss to the profession, but more importantly to the nation’s pupils who rely on their teachers to educate and care for them.
And setting out their pay demand, they say:
You must respond to the new economic reality of double-digit inflation and the threat this poses to teacher living standards. We call on you to commit to an inflation-plus increase for all teachers. It is not good enough to only propose higher increases for beginner teachers (which are themselves likely to be lower than inflation) ...
We have to tell you that failing sufficient action by you, in the autumn term, we will consult our members on their willingness to take industrial action.
And we will be strongly encouraging them to vote yes.
Today we’ve written to @nadhimzahawi. If teachers don’t receive the above inflation pay increase they deserve, we will be balloting for industrial action.
— National Education Union (@NEUnion) June 22, 2022
It's time to #ValueEducation and #ValueEducators pic.twitter.com/QQBXM4LWb7
Updated
This is from the FT’s Peter Foster on the Jim O’Neill interview on the Today programme. (See 9.33am.)
Intense frustration audible from Jim O’Neill on @BBCr4today about inability of @BorisJohnson to stick at policy and deliver #levellingup..that than just headline chasing. What some in Whitehall call “government by spasm”.
— Peter Foster (@pmdfoster) June 22, 2022
Bill of rights bill about applying 'common sense' to human rights legislation, says Raab
Dominic Raab, the justice secretary and deputy first minister, told LBC that his bill of rights bill (see 9.39am) was about applying “common sense” to human rights legislation. He explained:
No one is talking about tearing up human rights in this country. We are staying in the European convention, we are going to reinforce those quintessentially British rights like free speech.
But I do think, when it comes to public protection, people want to see a dose of common sense and balance provided, that’s what our reforms will achieve.
Updated
Dominic Raab, the justice secretary and deputy PM, was on the interview shows this morning to speak about the bill of rights bill being published today.
Here is our preview story by my colleague Haroon Siddique.
Here is a briefing on what’s proposed by my colleague Archie Bland, in his First Edition newsletter.
And here is a link to a briefing on it from the legal affairs commentator Joshua Rozenberg, who has also published a copy of the first page of the bill.
Government to publish its “bill of rights bill” today. But will it achieve what @MoJGovUK promises?
— Joshua Rozenberg (@JoshuaRozenberg) June 22, 2022
New analysis of what we know so far, free to read here:https://t.co/PWsdQ43yIi pic.twitter.com/oLholIZi1k
In his Today interview Jim O’Neill was also asked if he agreed with Mervyn King, the former governor of the Bank of England, who said recently the government needed to deliver a “clear narrative” about the economic problems facing the country. O’Neill agreed this was a problem. He said:
I am waiting for them to have a clear framework for their economic policy. The whole levelling up and Northern Powerhouse stuff..... is going to get lost again in all of this.
The government needs, instead of jumping from one policy and seemingly trying to pander to everyone’s whims, to develop a clear and articulate policy framework of which we don’t have one.
Updated
Big hike planned in value of state pensions ‘ludicrous’, says former Tory Treasury minister
Good morning. The latest inflation figures have come out, and they show the headline rate of inflation reached 9.1% in May, the highest figure for 40 years. My colleague Julia Kollewe has more details on the business live blog.
Rising inflation makes it harder for the government to explain why rail workers - and, indeed, almost everyone else - are expected to put up with pay rises worth less than the value of inflation (ie, a real-terms cut). This question was given extra force yesterday when the government confirmed that next year the state pension was likely to rise by significantly more than the value of inflation (because the increase will be pegged to the rate of inflation in September, which is likely to be 10% or more, but will be implemented for 2023-24, when inflation should be lower).
This morning the economist Jim O’Neill, a former Treasury minister, said this was “ludicrous”. Asked on the Today programme to explain why pensioners were getting 10%, but younger workers were lucky to get a pay rise of 3%, he said he had “no idea”. He went on:
It seems to me pensioners, given the pressure on fiscal policies and these inequality issues now for the past decade and beyond, the constant protection of pensioners seems ludicrous in itself and, in these circumstances, particularly crazy.
O’Neill is technically a Tory former Treasury minister; a former Goldman Sachs chief economist, he took the Conservative whip in the House of Lords while he served as a Treasury minister in David Cameron’s government from 2015 to 2016. But now he sits as a crossbencher, and he has recently started advising the Labour party on startup policy.
O’Neill did not mention two well-documented factors to help explain the government’s apparent generosity to pensioners. First, they are more likely to vote than younger people, meaning that as electors they tend to wield disproportionate influence. And, second, they are far more likely to vote Conservative than Labour.
Dominic Raab, the justice secretary and deputy prime minister, was interviewed on the Today programme just after O’Neill and he was also asked why pensioners deserved a rise not being given to workers. Raab said the government wanted to protect the vulnerable, and pensioners were at particular risk from rising energy costs. He told the programme:
The reason they’re in a different position - and our overall objective is to protect the most vulnerable - is because they are particularly vulnerable and they are disproportionately affected by the increase in energy costs which we know everyone is facing.
I will post more from the morning interviews shortly.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: Matthew Rycroft, permanent secretary at the Home Office, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee.
10am: Simon Hart, the Welsh secretary, gives evidence to the Commons Welsh affairs committee.
12pm: Boris Johnson faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.
Afternoon: The bill of rights bill is expected to be published.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Alternatively, you can email me at andrew.sparrow@theguardian.com
Updated
