Afternoon summary
Updated
Brandon Lewis says he will take legal steps to ensure abortion services fully provided in Northern Ireland
The UK government is taking legal steps to override the Northern Ireland executive and directly instruct the nation’s health trusts to provide abortion services, warning it will “take the necessary powers” to directly commission services if “urgent progress” is not made.
The Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis, set out the UK government’s legislative options in strong language in strong language today after it became “increasingly clear” that the Northern Ireland Department for Health will miss the end of March deadline to fully commission abortion services in Northern Ireland.
In a written ministerial statement Lewis said planned regulations would “remove the need for executive committee approval before services can be commissioned”, which has been a major obstacle to the commissioning of abortion services in Northern Ireland.
Terminations have been legal in Northern Ireland since 2019, but services have not been commissioned and individual clinicians have worked to provide a piecemeal service. A high court judge ruled in October last year that Lewis had failed to uphold his duties to provide full abortion services in Northern Ireland after a judicial review was brought by a woman told to travel to England for an abortion during the pandemic.
Abortion was legalised in Northern Ireland in October 2019 after a Westminster vote led by the Labour MP Stella Creasy took advantage of a paralysed Stormont, despite an 11th-hour attempt by the region’s assembly to block change. Officials confirmed termination could go ahead in April 2020 after the threat of legal action by pro-choice campaigners.
Creasy, whose amendment paved the way for the change in the law, said women in Northern Ireland had been waiting for equal access to their human rights for three years. “It is now imperative that the government confirm the timetable for action and what sanctions they will use should anyone try to prevent progress in delivering services to ensure that there is no further delay,” she said.
Q: Western officials are briefing that Russian use of chemical weapons would be highly unlikely to lead to a Nato intervention. Do you agree with that?
Johnson just says any move like that from Putin would be morally repugnant, indefensible and disastrous.
He does not address the point about whether Nato should respond militarily.
Johnson says the Russians are trying to get round the sanctions on the sale of gold. The west is trying to stop this.
Q: Russia has been told there will be severe consequences if it uses chemical weapons. What does that mean? Boots on the ground?
Johnson says there is a visceral horror of these weapons. He says it is useful to have “a bit of ambiguity” about how the west would respond. It would be catastrophic for Putin if he were to use them. He says the Russian claims about US chemical weapons activity are a false flag?
Q: Do you favour Ukraine getting automatic entry to the World Cup?
Johnson says football is not his best subject, but he does not see why not.
Updated
Q: How do you feel about being singled out by the Kremlin for being anti-Russian?
Johnson says he is not remotely anti-Russian. He is probably the only PM to be called Boris, he jokes.
He says you can be deeply hostile to President Putin, but sympathetic to the Russians.
Q: Will we have to allow more onshore wind farms to compensate for the loss of Russian energy?
Johnson says he thinks the massive opportunity is in offshore wind. Until recently, when it was overtaken by China, the UK was the biggest producer of offshore wind, he says.
Updated
Johnson says supplying Ukraine with tanks or jets would be ‘very difficult’ logistically
In his opening remarks Johnson stressed the need for Vladimir Putin to fail.
He is now taking questions.
Q: President Zelenskiy has made it clear he wants more weapons from Nato. Are you comfortable you ar sending enough? And is it right to rule out a no-fly zone, or putting boots on the ground?
Johnson says there is no western country contemplating putting boots on the ground. And enforcing a no-fly zone would mean attacking Russian aircraft, and that is not something Nato countries are contemplating either.
Q: Zelenskiy says he wants tanks and jets. Will you supply those, and if not, why not?
Johnson says the questioner (Sam Coates from Sky) is right Zelenskiy wants tanks and jets to relieve Mariupol.
He says they are looking at what they can do but logisically it looks “very difficult” to provide armour and jets.
Instead they are focusing on providing missiles and rocket launchers.
Updated
Boris Johnson's press conference at Nato
Boris Johnson is holding a press conference in Brussels after the Nato summit.
We have been covering the summit on our Ukraine war blog, and my colleague Léonie Chao-Fong will be covering Johnson’s Ukraine comments there.
I will be covering the press conference too, but focusing more on non-Ukraine comments.
Updated
In the comments a reader had a particularly technical question about the spring statement.
The Treasury has sent me an answer, and it’s “No”. It says:
For employees, the lower earnings limit is point at which individuals gain state pension and contributory benefit entitlement. This threshold will increase in line with just inflation as is default.
For the self-employed, the small profits threshold (SPT) is the point at which they gain access to the state pension and contributory benefits. The government is creating a new nil rate band between the SPT and LPL [lower profits limit, so that low earning self-employed do not pay class 2 NICs but keep their entitlement to contributory benefits. We will engage stakeholders on implementation.
Labour suggests PM misled MPs when he said government definitely taking P&O Ferries to court
Labour has suggested Boris Johnson was playing “fast and loose with the truth” when he told MPs yesterday that the government was definitely taking P&O Ferries to court for breaking employment law when it sacked 800 workers last week.
Johnson told MP at PMQs that he thought the company had broken the law and he said:
We will therefore be taking action ... If the company is found guilty, it will face fines running into millions of pounds ... We will take ’em to court, we will defend the rights of British workers.
But, during the P&O Ferries committee hearing this morning, ministers could not give details of when legal action might start, and one official said powers were not available to get an injunction against the company. (See 12.03pm.) And in the Commons, when Emily Thornberry, the shadow attorney general, asked if the governement law officers agreed with the PM that the law had definitely been broken, Alex Chalk, the solicitor general, refused to back Johnson’s statement. And, asked if there would definitely be a prosecution, Chalk just said the firm would be taken to court “if the law allows for a prosecution”.
Thornberry has written to Suella Braverman, the attorney general, asking her to clear the matter up. She says:
Can I therefore ask you again, as a matter of urgency, when the prime minister said yesterday on multiple occasions that the government would be taking P&O to court for breaching the 1992 Act, is that statement correct, is that actually happening, or was he playing fast and loose with the truth, with the law and with the hopes of hundreds of P&O workers, by claiming to take action that he is not?
Johnson expected Keir Starmer to raise the P&O Ferries sackings yesterday and, by explicitly saying a prosecution would take place, he was partially able to parry Starmer’s claim that the government had been ineffective in response to the scandal.
I've written to Suella Braverman with a simple question: when the PM said yesterday that the government was taking P&O to court, was that correct or was he playing fast and loose with the truth, the law and the hopes of 800 P&O workers, by claiming to take action that he is not? pic.twitter.com/ryVaDHiB2s
— Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) March 24, 2022
Covid hospital admission rates for people aged 75 and over in England have jumped to their highest level for more than a year, PA Media reports:
New cases of the virus are also estimated to be increasing among all age groups in all regions, with health chiefs warning numbers are likely to rise further.
Admission rates for hospital patients with Covid in England in both of the oldest age groups, 75 to 84-year-olds and people 85 and over, are now at their highest since mid-January 2021, when the second wave of the virus was at its peak.
The rate for over-85s stood at 178.3 per 100,000 people last week, up from 137.0 the previous week, while for people aged 75 to 84 it was 74.3, up from 59.8.
Rates among other age groups were lower, though all showed a week-on-week increase, according to the UK Health Security Agency (HSA).
The overall Covid-19 hospital admission rate in England stood at 17.9 per 100,000, up from 14.1 and the highest since the week to 16 January 2022.
The current surge in infections is being driven by the Omicron BA.2 variant – a more transmissible form of the virus.
Separate data published today by NHS England shows just over half of all Covid-19 patients in hospital trusts in England (55%) are being treated primarily for something else, a figure that is broadly unchanged on the last few weeks.
Updated
The latest edition of the Guardian’s Politics Weekly podcast is out. On the day of Rishi Sunak’s spring statement, Robin Burgess from the Hope Centre in Northampton tells Guardian political columnist John Harris just how desperate the cost of living situation is. John is also joined by Miatta Fahnbulleh, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, and David Gauke, former chief secretary to the Treasury, to discuss why the Tories seem resistant to helping those most in need.
Updated
In an article for Politics Home, the Conservative MP Peter Aldous has criticised the chancellor for not doing more in the spring statement to help people on benefits. Here’s an extract.
Having been forced to increase taxes in recent times to pay for the pandemic and deliver a sustainable funding model for social care, the chancellor is keen to brandish his tax-cutting credentials, and as a Conservative I sympathise with this. However, it is worth noting that the £5bn projected cost of the future cut in the basic rate of income tax is close to what was required to make the pandemic-induced £20 uplift to universal credit permanent. I called for this when the uplift was withdrawn last September and continue to believe that the government made a strategic mistake in doing this.
Having not remedied this mistake in his statement, I fear that the chancellor has now doubled down on it. With the economy in a state of near full employment, we must recognise the prevailing attitude that “more work is always the answer” cannot spare everyone the potential destitution some now face. The government would do well to be mindful of this in the months ahead.
In the Commons MPs have been debating the national insurance contributions (increase of thresholds) bill, legislation being rushed through parliament to implement the changes to tax thresholds announced in the spring statement yesterday. A few minutes ago it was given a second reading unopposed. Here are some of the best lines from the debate.
- Simon Clarke, the chief secretary to the Treasury, said benefit payments next year would go up in line with soaring inflation. Most benefits are uprated in April in line with the inflation the previous September, and this means this year claimants are getting a rise of just 3.1%, even though inflation is expected to average nearly 8% this year. The OBR said yesterday that this meant in real terms the value of benefits will fall 5% this year. Commenting on this criticism, Clarke said the government spent £243bn a year on welfare, including pensions, and that Britain was “a country where we do a huge amount to make sure that everyone is supported”. He went on:
If there is high inflation, as is forecast, during the course of 2022 that will be reflected in the uprating figures for April 2023 and the triple-lock will be in place to protect families.
- James Murray, a shadow Treasury minister, said Labour was supporting the bill because it would help people faced with the national insurance hike. He went on:
But we should be conscious that this bill has more to do with the chancellor’s increasingly desperate desire to paint himself as a tax cutter than it does with a well thought through package of measures to help people with the struggles they face.
- Richard Drax, a Conservative MP, said the government should cut taxes further because that would generate more wealth. He said:
I just want to say to the Treasury bench, with the cost of living spiralling and taxes at the highest for 70 years, can I urge them to go further? As they know full well, lower taxes generate more cash. It is a proven point. And something that Conservatives on this side of the house have fervently followed for as long as I can recall.
In fact, Rishi Sunak does not believe this. In his recent Mais lecture he specifically criticised Tories like Drax, saying: “I am disheartened when I hear the flippant claim that ‘tax cuts always pay for themselves’.”
- Drax also called for more spending cuts. He said:
In the chancellor’s statement yesterday what I didn’t hear was the good Conservative word ‘savings’. The opposition call it cuts, I call it savings. We appear to acquiesce to every demand for more money. This is taxpayers’ money and surely now it is time to review, for example, the big spenders, like the NHS and welfare. Of course they are both needed, but surely it is time to review both to make sure that we are getting value for money.
- Richard Thomson, the SNP’s deputy Treasury spokesman, compared Sunak to a pickpocket returning a wallet after removing the money. He said:
For me the chancellor here, in his statement, cuts the figure of the pickpocket who expects some credit for returning half an hour later to hand you back your wallet after abstracting the cash and the credit cards that were inside it.
Updated
Labour says Grant Shapps should publish details of exactly what he was told last year about plans for a restructuring at P&O Ferries. MPs were told this morning that Shapps was told that changes were planned at a meeting in Dubai with P&O’s parent company. (See 11.34am.) Commenting on the hearing, Louise Haigh, the shadow transport secretary, said:
P&O Ferries brazenly admit they tore up the law to sack loyal British workers and pay destitution wages, and despite the claims of Boris Johnson, the Conservative government has still done absolutely nothing to act.
The shambolic response of ministers has left loyal British workers high and dry.
Grant Shapps has questions to answer. The Committee was told he was informed in a meeting in Dubai of P&O Ferries’ plans to change their business model - that model meant sacking loyal workers to pay destitution wages.
He must publish the record of that conversation.
The Department for Transport says Shapps was not told what changes were planned. (See 12.53pm.)
Johnson urges Nato leaders to supply more lethal military aid to Ukraine
Boris Johnson told world leaders that there must be a significant increase in lethal aid to Ukraine from across the alliance, saying “we have the means and they have the need”.
In a private meeting of Nato leaders, Johnson said that the west could not count on any possible retreat by Russia – and said history would judge them if they did not do enough to help.
A No 10 source said that Johnson told the assembled leaders that they all wanted Putin to “come to his senses and put his tanks in reverse” but said it would not happen. “He’s going to grind on ... he only has forward gears,” Johnson said.
Johnson said that the resistance of Ukraine had “fundamentally changed the geopolitics of Europe” and that it required a reassessment of the support the west was offering. “People will ask – did we do enough?” he told them, saying leaders could not “deny them in their moment of agony”.
Updated
P&O boss should resign after saying his company knowingly broke law, says transport committee chair
Huw Merriman, the Conservative chair of the Commons transport committee, has said that Peter Hebblethwaite should resign in the light of his admission to MPs this morning that his company deliberately chose to break the law about consulting the workforce about redundancies. (See 11.20am and 11.48am.) Merriaman told Radio 4’s World at One:
We have to make it absolutely clear to P&O that they’ve broken the law. There are ramifications for that – personally liability for the chief executive who, I have to say, needs to consider his position. It’s untenable to come to parliament say you decided to break the law, you have no regrets. We can’t have companies run by people like that. And so he needs to hand his card in.
Updated
No 10 rejects Kremlin claim PM most active anti-Russian leader, saying he's just anti-Putin
This morning the Kremlin described Boris Johnson as the most active anti-Russian leader during the war in Ukraine. As Reuters reports, Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesperson, said:
As for Mr Johnson, we see him as the most active participant in the race to be anti-Russian ... It will lead to a foreign policy dead end.
In response, the PM’s spokesperson said that Johnson was anti-Putin, not anti-Russian. The spokesperson said:
The prime minister is among the most active anti-Putin leaders: we have no issue with the Russian people. And in fact, we’ve seen many bravely protest, not least Alexei Navalny, against Putin’s regime, and call them to cease this war.
But we are among some of the world leaders that have been most proactive when it comes to taking steps to both defend Ukraine’s interest and up the pressure on on Putin to change course.
In truth, the Kremlin “endorsement” is probably one that Johnson relishes – not least because it goes some way to refuting claims that the Tories have been soft on Moscow in the past because their relationship with Russian donors.
Updated
The most interesting evidence in the P&O Ferries committee hearing this morning came from the company’s boss, Peter Hebblethwaite. But a range of other witnesses spoke to the committee before he appeared, and here are some of the key points they made.
Mick Lynch, general secretary of the RMT union, said P&O Ferries had “made flagrant breaches of the law”. He said: “They’ve done it deliberately and they’ve factored in what they’re going to have to pay for it.”
(Later, Hebblethwaite confirmed this. See 11.20am.)
Lynch also said that the law was not protecting seafarers and that the merchant navy was at risk. He said:
The politicians and the lawyers in this country have watched over the last 30 years, while not only workers have been made vulnerable, but our merchant marine has been decimated and destroyed.
If this goes the way it’s likely to go from what I’ve seen, we won’t have a merchant navy in this country.
There will be no ratings working in British ports. British ships will cease to exist, and British ratings will cease to exist.
That’s what P&O are aiming to achieve, to kill our merchant marine and to kill our employment laws, and something’s got to be done about it today.
Dean Beale, CEO of the Insolvency Service, told the committee the government may not receive an answer on whether P&O Ferries broke the law until 8 April. He said:
My team are working through all of the facts on this case and looking at the law. We will quickly, I think, arrive at a determination as to whether there have been breaches and what action can be taken as a result of that ..
The secretary of state has asked for a response from us by April 8 - so we’re working very hard.
Andrew Burns QC, a barrister at Devereaux Chambers, told the commitee that he thought P&O Ferries had broken employment law. He explained:
In broad terms, all employers with ships must give a notice to the appropriate authority 45 days before dismissal. My understanding from what I’ve been told this morning is that the notice was given to the appropriate authorities in the countries where the ships are flagged only on the day of the dismissals and not in advance.
Updated
At the P&O Ferries committee hearing earlier MPs were told that Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, was told last November that the company was planning some changes to its operation. (See 11.34am.)
But a Department for Transport spokeswoman said DP World did not tell Shapps of “any changes it would be making to P&O Ferries” and there was “no indication of the completely unacceptable changes it has subsequently made”.
In an interview this morning, asked about the controversy about Russia expressing an interest in hosting the Euro 2028 football tournament, Boris Johnson suggested it should be handed to Ukraine.
Later, at the No 10 lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson insisted that the PM’s remark did not mean the government was not still committed to the joint UK/Ireland bid to host the contest.
Huw Merriman, the chair of the transport committee, ends the session by saying they have heard “a tale of corporate thuggery”.
He says that he hopes the government will look at going immediately to the high court to seek an injunction against P&O Ferries. And he says he hopes the government will legislate too.
That’s it. The session is over.
I will shortly post some of the evidence given by the witnesses who spoke before the P&O Ferries chief executive, Peter Hebblethwaite.
Updated
Huw Merriman (Con) asks what the PM was referring to during PMQs yesterday. What law will be changed?
Courts says the government is still looking at this.
Scully says the government is looking at loopholes in minimum wage legislation as it applies to seafarers.
Updated
Andy McDonald (Lab) is asking the questions now.
Q: Will ministers consider stepping in and operating these ferries as an operator of last resort?
Courts says what P&O have done is “disgusting”. But the government has to act within the law.
McDonald replies: “This is the law factory. We can make the law.”
Courts ignores the point, and just says government has to act within the law.
Q: Will you cancel DP World’s involvement in two freeports?
Courts says the government is looking at this. But these schemes have implications going beyond transport. And, as the PM said at PMQs yesterday, the government also wants to protect inward investment.
Minister agrees to consult attorney general about possibility of immediate legal action over P&O sackings
Ben Bradshaw (Lab) is asking the questions now. He asks why the government won’t seek an interim injunction now to suspend the sackings in the light of the P&O Ferries’ admission that they broke the law.
Scully says the government has already asked the Insolvency Service to look at this. He says he is speaking to them on a daily basis.
Bradshaw asks if they have consulted the attorney general, the government’s most senior law officer, about what might be done.
Scully implies he hasn’t. Huw Merriman, chair of the transport committee, asks if he will now consult the attorney general in the light of the new evidence heard today. Scully says he will.
Updated
Scully tells the committee that, when companies realise that they rise unlimited fines for breaking these laws, that will stop them.
Here is my colleague Gwyn Topham’s snap story on the committee hearing.
Robert Courts, the transport minister, says the government had heard more from the company today about how it intentionally ignore the rules on consulting workers. He says he will consider if there is any further action the government can take.
He says the government will come to parliament next week with a package of proposals, implementing the commitment Boris Johnson made at PMQs yesterday to close loopholes that allow ferry companies to evade some obligations under UK law.
Minister says he was 'horrified' to hear P&O boss say they knowingly broke law
The committee is now taking evidence from Paul Scully, the business minister, and Robert Courts, the transport minister.
Scully says he was “horrified” to hear Peter Hebblethwaite say earlier that the company had broken the law by not consulting its workers. (See 11.48am.)
The government is writing to the Insolvency Service about this. It will look at the liability of individual directors, he says.
He says ministers want answers as soon as possible.
Huw Merriman (Con), chair of the transport committee is asking the questions.
Q: What are you going to do immediately? They are laughing at parliament.
Scully says the government is looking at whether directors are fit and proper; at whether the government broke the law on notification, in Cyprus and in the UK; and at whether they broke the law on consultation.
Q: Have you considered an injunction? They have just said they broke the law.
Scully says the government has looked at this. An official giving evidence alongside him says they have not found any powers they could use to seek an injunction.
Merriman says the government should go to the high court anyway, even if there is risk of losing.
Scully says, if the company has breached notification law, the company could face an unlimited fine.
Q: Have you seen the notification letters sent to three different jurisdictions?
Scully says the government has not. A failure to notify Cyprus would come under Cypriot law, he says. The government is looking at the implications under UK law.
He says P&O Ferries has responded to requests for information. But the government is not taking that at face value.
Updated
P&O Ferries boss accepts company broke law by not consulting workforce about redundancies
Darren Jones (Lab) says P&O Ferries chose not to consult the workforce, and to pay off staff instead. Are you in breach of your obligations as a company director?
Hebblethwaite says the company did not think it had any alternative. He does not dispute the claim that the company broke the law.
UPDATE: Hebblethwaite said:
As I say, I completely throw our hands up, my hands up, that we did choose not to consult. We did not believe there was any other way to do this and we are compensating people in full.
Updated
In response to claims that the company is now “morally bankrupt”, if not financially bankrupt, Hebblethwaite accepts that the reputation of the company has taken a hit.
But he says that if the company had not acted, it would have gone bust. He says:
We weren’t viable before, and I know that if we hadn’t made radical changes the business would have closed, and I apologise for that.
But genuinely, that would not have been 800 redundancies with substantial severance packages, that would have been 3,000 people losing their jobs.
He admits that bookings have gone down as a result of what happened, particularly on the Dover-Calais route.
Some people certainly have [cancelled bookings] and the reduction in bookings is different on different routes. On Dover-Calais we have taken a particularly large decline but that’s because those bookings tend to be made two weeks ahead.
Updated
Shapps was told in November that P&O Ferries would be making some changes, MPs told
Q: Did the company give the government any advance notice of what was happening?
Hebblethwaite said Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, was in Dubai last November for Expo. He said Shapps met some executives from DP World, the P&O Ferries parent company, and as part of a wider discussion about investment in the UK, “the subject of P&O Ferries was brought and that we would be needing to make some changes to our business this year”.
Hebblethwaite said at that point the plans had not been finalised. So, he said, he doubted Shapps was given much detail.
Later, when pressed on this again, he said he did not think the conversation with Shapps in November about restructuring would have contained “much substance”.
Updated
Hebblethwaite says this was a board decision by P&O Ferries. He says it was not forced on them by DP World, their Dubai-based parent company.
He says they anticipated it would be “very difficult, very controversial”.
Q: Are you worried this could bring about the end of the company?
Hebblethwaite says it will be a tough job rebuilding the company. But it will now be competitive.
Updated
P&O Ferries to halve its costs by paying workers £5.50 an hour on average, MPs told
Hebblethwaite clarifies the lowest pay rate being offered. It is £5.15 an hour, not £5.50 an hour, which was the figure MPs thought he said earlier. But he says it varies between £5.15 and £6 - depending on exchange rates.
UPDATE: PA Media has more on this exchange.
Asked how much money P&O Ferries will save by sacking 800 staff and employing agency workers, Hebblethwaite said: “This entirely different model is about half the price of the previous model.”
Questioned on what the lowest hourly rate would be in the new model, Hebblethwaite said: “About £5.15. The average rate is from about £5.50 to about £6, depending on exchange rate.”
Commenting on whether he believed that was a fair wage or whether he saw it as “modern day slavery”, Hebblethwaite said: “The rates we are paying are in line or above ITF minimum standards and it is the operating model that the vast majority of operators across the globe work to. So this is the competitive standard.”
Updated
P&O Ferries boss says no point consulting on restructuring because 'no union could accept it'
Hebblethwaite admits the company did not consult the workforce about the sackings. He says workers are being compensated for that.
UPDATE: Hebblethewaite said:
We assessed that given the fundamental nature of change, no union could accept it and therefore we chose not to consult because a consultation process would have been a sham. We didn’t want to put anybody through that. We are compensating people in full and up-front for that decision.
Updated
Asked why security guards were employed to escort people off ferries yesterday, Hebblethwaite says it was a stressful time for them. McDonald says the company made it stressful.
Updated
Hebblethwaite says, where the company is governed by the national living wage, it will pay it. But he says it does not apply in all circumstances for shipping.
On the routes that are international routes, that are governed by ITF [International Transport Workers’ Federation] standards, we are paying above ITF minimum wages ...
Where we are governed by national minimum wage, we will absolutely pay national minimum wage. This is an international seafaring model that is consistent with models throughout the globe and our competitors.
Asked by Labour’s Andy McDonald if he could survive on £5.50 an hour, Hebblethwaite declines to answer. McDonald says he takes that as a no.
UPDATE: PA Media has more on this exchange.
Hebblethwaite did not answer when asked by McDonald: “Could you sustain your lifestyle?” if he was paid the same as the new workers.
McDonald went on: “No, you couldn’t, could you? Why do you expect people who’ve got such responsible jobs to be able to do that? How do you expect them to be able to feed their families and pay their bills?”
Updated
'Are you just a shameless criminal?' - P&O boss questioned by MPs over mass sackings
Peter Hebblethwaite, chief executive of P&O Ferries, is about to start giving evidence to a Commons committee investigating his companies decision to sack 800 seafarers last week with no notice.
Darren Jones (Lab), chair of the Commons business committee, started by saying he had looked at Hebblethewaite’s CV. He asks if the company is in this mess because Hebblethwaite does not know what he is doing. “Or are you just a shameless criminal?”
Hebblethwaite starts with an apology. He says he wants to start with an apology to the seafarers affected by last week’s decision, to their families and to other employees.
Can I start these with an apology? An apology to seafarers that were affected on Thursday of last week, an apology to their families, an apology to the 2,200 of our employees who have had to face very difficult questions over the last week or so.
You may see this as a late apology and I just want to reassure you the reason that you’re hearing this for the first time today is because I’ve spent the last week in the business, talking to our people one to one.
He says the company was losing “an unsustainable amount of money”. If the firm had not acted, it would have had to close, he says.
He disputes claims heard by the committee earlier that the firm was in breach of its obligations to give sufficient notice of the sackings to the authorities where the ships are registered.
Hebblethwaite says he is paid £325,000.
Q: Would you take a performance related bonus if offered?
Hebblethwaite says that is not something he has considered.
He claims some of the dismissed staff could receive as much as £170,000 as a pay-off. When pressed, he admits that very few people are in this category. But he says 40 people could get more than £100,000.
"I think that P&O was otherwise going to close," P&O chief executive Peter Hebblethwaite tell MPs, after sudden sacking of 800 workers
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) March 24, 2022
And if offered, would he accept a performance-related bonus following the sackings?
"I don't know the answer to that"https://t.co/dkAXl9hzjG pic.twitter.com/QunWK1y2Ac
Updated
Summary of IFS analyis of spring statement
And here is a full summary of the key points from Paul Johnson’s IFS briefing. (See 10.38am.)
- The IFS described Rishi Sunak as a “fiscal illusionist”, stressing that overall taxes are rising under his plans. (See 10.38am.) Sunak is presiding over “a very big increase in the tax burden”, despite his rhetoric implying otherwise, Johnson said.
- The IFS said the income tax cut pencilled in for 2024 would not lead to the overall tax take falling that year because of inflation and fiscal drag (tax thresholds not rising as fast as wages). Johnson said:
On current plans Mr Sunak’s income tax changes won’t actually depress income tax revenues in 2024-25. Despite the cut in the basic rate planned for that year, the income tax take will stay about the same as in the previous year, and then continue rising. That’s the effect of inflation and fiscal drag. They have magically doubled the scale of the tax rise he announced last year – the four-year freeze in the personal allowance and higher rate threshold. The proposed cut in the basic rate gives back only about half of the additional windfall he is now expecting to enjoy from that measure.
- The IFS said it was inevitable that the £2.4bn cut in fuel duty announced yesterday would end up being permanent – and not a 12-month one-off, as intended. That means that next year the Treasury will have to find the money to fund it. Johnson said:
There’s another illusion in there too – the annually repeated illusion that fuel duties will actually rise next year. Not only do the public finance forecasts depend upon the 5p cut being reversed, they assume an increase in line with the RPI on top of that. The odds against the former feel long. I reckon an RPI increase on top is about as likely as my winning the national lottery. And I don’t play the lottery.
- The IFS said public sector workers face “hefty” real-terms pay cuts in the future. (See 10.38am.)
- It said that increasing the national insurance threshold was a “pretty progressive giveaway”. But it said cutting the basic rate of income tax was “regressive”.
- It said the statement had exposed the “absurdity” of claiming that the health and social care levy (the national insurance increase) was linked to health and social care spending. Johnson said:
The absurdity of the idea that the NI increase, which will become the health and social care levy, is in any way hypothecated to health and social care was laid even more bare yesterday. The cut in NI receipts from yesterday’s new measure is not leading to, and of course should not lead to, a cut in funding for the NHS and social care.
- The IFS said Sunak had not taken the chance “to protect the poorest more fully” by uprating their benefits in line with actual inflation.
- It said increasing national insurance while promising to cut the basic rate of income tax was “indefensible from an ecnomic point of view”, although it said there might be political reasons for these moves.
Updated
Public sector workers face 'hefty' real-terms pay cuts under 'fiscal illusionist' Sunak's plans, says IFS
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank, has delivered his considered verdict on the spring statement at a briefing.
He dismissed Rishi Sunak as a “fiscal illusionist” and warned that public sector workers face “hefty” real-terms pay cuts in the future under Sunak’s plans. He said:
Mr Sunak has proved to be something of a fiscal illusionist. He told us that he cut taxes yesterday. In a sense he did. He increased the floor for NICs and promised a cut in income tax in 2024. So Mr Sunak’s statement contained big new tax cuts. But it also allowed taxes to rise. He can now expect to raise more in tax as a share of national income by 2025 than he expected last October. In fact, taxes are set to rise to their highest level as a fraction of national income since Clement Attlee was prime minister. Not my comparison, that comes directly from the OBR.
And on public sector pay, he said:
[Sunak] is also effectively cutting spending on public services in real terms relative to previous plans. Yesterday he offered them no extra cash at all to deal with higher inflation. The exact scale of this cut relative to previous plans is a little uncertain, but it is significant. It will almost certainly mean some more hefty real pay cuts across the public sector, coming on top of cuts both in real terms and relative to the private sector over the last 12 years.
I will post a full summary of the points from the briefing shortly.
Reeves mocks Sunak's claims to be tax cutting chancellor
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, was also doing a morning interview round earlier, and she used her appearances to hammer home Labour’s message that Rishi Sunak is a tax-raising chancellor. She told BBC Breakfast:
This is a tax raising chancellor. The tax burden is the highest it’s been since the 1940s.
And on LBC she mocked Sunak’s claims to be a tax cutter. She said:
The chancellor can say as many times as he likes that he’s a tax-cutting chancellor but it’s a bit like a kid in his bedroom playing air guitar – he’s not a rockstar.
The problem is for this chancellor, is that by the end of this parliament seven out of eight people will be paying more taxes – only one in eight will be paying less taxes.
Reeves also said the UK was now the only major advanced economy increasing taxes on working people during “difficult times” and that figures showed this was the largest drop in living standards since the 1950s.
That’s a disaster for working people, for the poorest people in society who are struggling with rising food prices, rising petrol prices and most of all the big increases in tax and electricity bills.
Updated
Photograph: Thomas Coex/AFP/Getty Images
The Resolution Foundation has now published online its 36-page analysis of the spring statement. It’s here (pdf).
Sunak hints consumers could get more help with energy bills before autumn
And her are some more lines from Rishi Sunak’s interviews this morning.
- Sunak, the chancellor, hinted that the government could offer consumers more help with energy bills before the autumn. Asked if the government would help if energy bills were still rising at that point, he replied:
Yes, of course we’ll have to see where we are by the autumn and it’s right for people to recognise that they are protected between now and the autumn because of the price cap.
Pressed on whether that meant he would intervene before October, Sunak replied:
I always keep everything under review, and the government, as it’s shown over the past two years, is always responsive to what’s happening. But I would say with energy prices, you know, they are very volatile, and I don’t think you, I or anyone else has any certainty about what will happen in October right now.
- He claimed that helping the poorest people in the country was his “priority”. When it was put to him that he did not use the spring statement to target support for people on the lowest incomes, he said that his prioritised this group in his budget last autumn, when he cut the taper rate for universal credit. That made the benefit more generous, he said.
Johnson hints at further help for people, saying 'cost of living is biggest thing we have to fix, and we will fix it'
Boris Johnson gave an interview to LBC this morning, ahead of his participation at the Nato meeting, and although he mostly spoke about Ukraine, he was also asked about the spring statement. He hinted that there would be more help to come for people struggling with the cost of living.
“As we go forward, we need to do more,” Johnson told LBC’s Nick Ferrari, although he then went on to talk about his energy security strategy, which is due next week.
Asked if there could be further tax cuts before the general election, Johnson sidestepped the question, but told Ferrari:
Don’t forget that I think that the cost of living is the single biggest thing we’re having to fix and we will fix it.
Asked about the prospect of Russia hosting the European football championships in 2028, Johnson said he did not believe a bid would be considered. He said:
It’s beyond satire that any football organisation, no matter how bonkers and driven by lucre they may be, would want to give Russia in the present circumstances the right to host a tournament.
The state opening of parliament, and the Queen’s speeech, will take place on May 10, the government has announced. That marks the start of the new parliamentary session. The current session of parliament will be prorogued before then, but the government has not set a date for that yet.
UK sanctions 65 more Russian people and firms, including Sergei Lavrov's stepdaughter
The government has announced 65 more Russian organisations and individuals have been sanctioned. The Foreign Office says:
Today’s sanctions target key industries supporting Russia’s illegal invasion, including Russian Railways and defence company Kronshtadt, the main producer of Russian drones. The Wagner Group – the organisation Russian mercenaries reportedly tasked with assassinating President Zelenskyy - has also been sanctioned.
Six more banks are targeted, including Alfa Bank whose cofounders include previously sanctioned oligarchs Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven and German Khan. The world’s largest diamond producer Alrosa is also sanctioned.
Individuals sanctioned include the billionaire oil tycoon Eugene Shvidler, founder of Tinkoff bank Oleg Tinkov, Herman Gref, the CEO of Russia’s largest bank Sberbank, and Polina Kovaleva, foreign minister Lavrov’s stepdaughter. Galina Danilchenko, who was installed by Russia as the ‘mayor’ of Melitopol is also sanctioned - the first time an individual has been sanctioned for collaboration with Russian forces currently in Ukraine.
Polina Kovaleva, Sergei Lavrov’s stepdaughter, reportedly lives in a £4m flat in Kensington. Commenting on her inclusion in the list, the Foreign Office said: “This sends a strong signal that those benefiting from association of those responsible for Russian aggression are in scope of our sanctions”
Commenting on the new sanctions, Liz Truss, the foreign seceretary, said:
These oligarchs, businesses and hired thugs are complicit in the murder of innocent civilians and it is right that they pay the price. Putin should be under no illusions – we are united with our allies and will keep tightening the screw on the Russian economy to help ensure he fails in Ukraine. There will be no let-up”.
All those sanctioned today will have their assets in the UK frozen which means no UK citizen or company can do business with them, and individuals subject to travel bans are also prohibited from travelling to or from the UK.
Updated
Photograph: Reuters
Rishi Sunak says he ‘can’t make every problem go away’ after criticism of spring statement
Good morning. At Westminster there’s an old saying about how budgets that are well received on the day tend to fall apart, while those that aren’t instantly applauded end up being seen as successful. If this were true, Rishi Sunak would be able to console himself with the knowledge that the spring statement was brilliant, because the immediate response has been unusually negative. Sunak’s surprise decision to announce a 1p cut in the basic rate of income tax for 2024 seemed intended to placate the right-wingers, in the Conservative party and the media, who have been demanding tax cuts increasingly aggressively. But even this audience is disappointed, as a quick glance at this morning’s papers will tell you.
Sunak has been doing a round of interviews this morning, and he has resorted to arguing that there is a limit to what he can do. He told BBC Breakfast:
I can’t make every problem go away, but where we can make a difference we want to ...
I’ve always been honest; these are global challenges that we face.
We’re not alone in experiencing them, and I can’t, I wish I could - and it’s the hardest part about this job not being able to do everything that people would like you to do - but I can’t make every problem go away, but where we can make a difference we want to, and that’s what yesterday was about.
It is true that there is always a limit to what governments can do, but this argument is unlikely to impress voters, particularly with opposition parties highlighting policies that Sunak could be adopting, like a windfall tax on energy companies, that he has rejected.
The extent of the limitations of the spring statement have been highlighted by an analysis out this morning from the Resolution Foundation thinktank saying that, by not doing more for the poorest families, the proposals will see 1.3 million people – including half a million children – pushed below the poverty line next year. My colleague Mark Sweney has the story here.
I will post more from Sunak’s morning interview round shortly.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Boris Johnson is attending a meeting of Nato leaders in Brussels.
9am: The Resolution Foundation holds a briefing to present its analysis of the spring statement.
10.15am: And the Institute for Fiscal Studies holds a briefing to present its analyis of the statement.
11am: Peter Hebblethwaite, chief executive of P&O Ferries, gives evidence to the Commons transport committee about the sacking without notice of 800 of its workers last week. At 11.45am Robert Courts, the transport minister, and Paul Scully, the business minister, are giving evidence. Other witnesses giving evidence during the course of the morning include lawyers and union leaders.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
After 11.30am: MPs debate and vote on the changes to national insurance contribution thresholds announced yesterday.
12pm: Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, takes questions from MSPs.
Mid afternoon: Johnson is expected to hold a press conference in Brussels.
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
