Afternoon summary
The Tory former cabinet minister Simon Clarke has been told it would be “good advice” to head to a dark room, lie down and sort himself out, after he called on Rishi Sunak to quit as Conservative leader or risk a Tory “massacre” at the general election. At PMQs Keir Starmer taunted Sunak over Clarke’s comments, telling the house:
The prime minister spouts so much nonsense, no wonder they are giving up on him. Even now, as his government crumble around him and his own MPs point out that he is out of touch and has no plan for growth, crime or building houses, the prime minister is sticking to his one-man Pollyanna show – everything is fine; people should be grateful for him! The trouble is that no one is buying it. Does he actually understand why his own MPs say that he does not understand Britain, and that he is an “obstacle to recovery”.
Updated
Law Society criticises government for not scheduling Commons debate on UK-Rwanda treaty
Tom Pursglove, the minister for legal migration, has indicated in a Commons written answer that the government is not planning to let MPs have a debate and vote on the government’s treaty with Rwanda. He said the Rwanda policy had already been scrutinised by MPs in the debates on the Rwanda bill.
The Law Society of England and Wales has criticised this decision. Its vice-president, Richard Atkinson, said:
It is extremely disappointing that the government won’t make time for the House of Commons to debate the Rwanda treaty, despite the House of Lords vote in favour of delaying ratification.
Given the supreme court found serious risks in the government’s Rwanda plan, this treaty ought to be scrutinised carefully to ensure the risks identified are fully addressed.
MPs’ calls for a proper debate on the treaty are being ignored. It’s crucial to debate the substance of the treaty because any shortcomings will fatally undermine the safety of Rwanda bill and the government’s wider asylum policy.
Earlier this month the home affairs committee said in a report there should be a Commons debate on the UK-Rwanda treaty.
Updated
The Scottish government has refused to respond directly to demands from Labour for confirmation that it has handed all Nicola Sturgeon’s private emails about the Covid crisis to the UK inquiry. (See 2.02pm.) In response, it said:
The Scottish government is committed to responding to both the UK and Scottish Covid-19 inquiries, as learning lessons from the pandemic is vital to prepare for the future.
It would be inappropriate to comment on any matters being considered by the UK Covid Inquiry while hearings are ongoing.
The permanent secretary will reply to the letter [from Labour] in due course.
Labour MP Tahir Ali apologises for using disrespectful language when critising Sunak's pro-Israel stance
The Labour MP Tahir Ali has apologised for claiming that Rishi Sunak has “the blood of thousands of people on his hands” over his support for Israel. (See 12.38pm.)
Colleagues sitting behind Ali, the MP for Birmingham Hall Green, could be seen shaking their heads during prime minister’s questions as he levelled the accusation against Sunak, who promptly replied: “That is the face of the changed Labour party.”
Ali later issued two statements on X, formerly Twitter, saying:
(1/2) Earlier at PMQs I asked the Prime Minister about the actions of Israel in Gaza.
— Tahir Ali MP (@TahirAliMP) January 24, 2024
This is obviously a deeply emotive issue. While I do not resile from my strongly held views on the situation in the Middle East I would like to apologise for the way in which I described
Earlier at PMQs I asked the Prime Minister about the actions of Israel in Gaza. This is obviously a deeply emotive issue. While I do not resile from my strongly held views on the situation in the Middle East I would like to apologise for the way in which I described
2/2) the Prime Minister in my question. We all have a responsibility to be respectful in the language that we use, even when discussing difficult and, at times, sensitive issues.
Updated
Poorest nations suffering most from Houthi attacks on shipping in Red Sea, Grant Shapps tells MPs
The Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea are affecting the poorest nations the most, Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, has claimed.
Opening a general Commons debate on the attacks, which have led to the UK twice participating in US-led airstrikes against the Houthis, Shapps said:
Some 12% of international trade passes through the Red Sea every single year … amounting to more than $1tn worth of goods. In addition 8% of global grain trade, 12% of seaborne-traded oil, and 8% of the world’s liquefied natural gas all passes through this ancient seaway.
Perhaps even more astonishing is that 40% of the goods that are traded between Europe and Asia go through the Red Sea as well. Sadly, the Houthis’ unlawful and callous attacks are putting all of that trade at risk …
What these Iran-backed Houthi pirate thugs forget is that it is the least well-off nations and people who suffer the most from their illegal actions, starting with Yemen itself, where almost all of their food comes to it by sea.
So at times like this, these nations need to be stood up to, and nations must stand up to them. Attacks on Red Sea shipping automatically make this a global problem.
Updated
UK government says it is considering limiting what civil servants in Scotland can do on Westminster reserved matters
The Scottish and UK governments are heading for a fresh battle over contentious Scottish policies such as independence after ministers in London confirmed they plan to release new rules to civil servants on reserved powers.
The Labour peer George Foulkes has waged a long-running campaign to bar ministers in Edinburgh from spending public money on a second independence referendum, and on Scotland’s network of “pretend embassies” overseas, claiming those are reserved matters.
The UK government today told a Lords constitution committee, in a response to a report on civil service appointments:
The government recognises the strength of the argument that further guidance to tighten up best practice is required and is in the process of considering how such guidance would support civil servants working in the devolved administrations on areas that may relate to reserved matters, and help ensure the civil service code is always maintained.
This confirms earlier pledges to do so, but Foulkes said:
The SNP project has deliberately gnawed away at the boundary between devolved and reserved matters, and this report serves as a very timely reminder that utilising civil servants to support efforts to break up the UK does not fall under devolved competencies.
However, words must now be turned into actions. One rogue administration cannot be allowed to stain the integrity of our civil service, with their petty identity politics.
This raises tricky issues around constitutional proprieties. The SNP has won four successive Holyrood elections on a manifesto proposing independence. Previous Labour and Lib Dem administrations in Edinburgh funded overseas missions to promote inward investment. Would restrictions here be a precedent barring spending on other election pledges?
Foulkes and other critics argue the UK supreme court ruling in 2022 that Nicola Sturgeon could not hold a second referendum without Westminster’s approval makes it ultra vires to spend public money on issues reserved to Westminster. But so far, no Scottish spending has gone on setting up an unlawful referendum.
The Scottish government said it had “a clear mandate to provide the people of Scotland with the information they need to make an informed choice about their future”. It added: “It is the role of the civil service to support the elected government of the day in developing and implementing its policies.”
Updated
Referring to the extract from the Commons order paper published earlier (see 11.56am), a reader asks:
On the list of people due to ask questions why do some get a ‘Mr’ or ‘Mrs’ and others do not?
And here is the answer from a Commons official.
Members are able to choose the title applied to their preferred form of name, which is displayed on the members’ biography pages of the website and in other procedural systems in parliament. Shortly after a member joins the house, a member will be contacted by the house administration where they can request their preferred form of name, which is then added to their biographical record. Preferred forms of name can be changed over time based on the members’ preference.
No 10 says conscription not being considered after army chief says war against Russia would be 'whole-of-nation undertaking'
The people of the UK are part of a “prewar generation” who must be prepared to fight a major war against Vladimir Putin’s increasingly aggressive Russia if necessary, Gen Sir Patrick Sanders, the head of the army, argued in a speech.
But, as Dan Sabbagh reports in his story, the Ministry of Defence insisted that Sanders was not proposing peacetime conscription.
Downing Street and the Labour party both insisted they would not back conscription. At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson, when asked if Sunak would rule out conscription, replied:
There is no suggestion of that. The government has no intention to follow through with that.
The British military has a proud tradition of being a voluntary force. There are no plans to change that.
And Keir Starmer’s spokesperson told journalists that conscription was not Labour policy.
DUP have negotiated 'very good deal' over changes to Windsor framework, Tory MP tells Commons
MPs are currently debating the Northern Ireland (executive formation) bill, which gives more time for a power-sharing executive to be formed before elections legally have to be held because no executive is in place. It sets 8 February as the new deadline and yesterday Chris Heaton-Harris, the Northern Ireland secretary, suggested that he hoped that by then the government would have successfully persuaded the DUP to lift its boycott of power sharing.
The DUP has been refusing to sit in the executive as a protest against the post-Brexit trading rules set out in the Northern Ireland protocol, and its revised version, the Windsor framework. In the debate Julian Smith, a former Tory Northern Ireland secretary, said he thought the DUP had negotiated a good deal. He said:
[Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader] and his team, I understand, seem to have negotiated also a very good deal with the government on issues around the Windsor framework and I hope in the coming days and weeks we will be able to see the results of that work.
I am sure some within his party will still have concerns this will not be perfect, but much better now, having moved forward and done so much work over the last few months, to go back into the executive and to make the further arguments from there.
Sky’s Sam Coates says the DUP may have secured the removal of checks on goods going from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
Lots of speculation about what the DUP might have been offered to them to get them back to Stormont.
I’m told there it included a change to the law to “direct” the end of any checks on goods moving lawfully GB to NI and an Independent Monitoring Panel
Since’s it’s a “domestic” matter, the UK were going to +inform+ not negotiate with the EU.
Lots of speculation about what the DUP might have been offered to them to get them back to Stormont.
— Sam Coates Sky (@SamCoatesSky) January 24, 2024
I'm told there it included a change to the law to "direct" the end of any checks on goods moving lawfully GB to NI and an Independent Monitoring Panel
Since's it's a "domestic"…
Updated
Labour says it was 'clearly inappropriate' for Tahir Ali to say Sunak has blood on his hands due to support for Israel
Keir Starmer’s spokesperson has described a claim by a Labour MP that Rishi Sunak has “the blood of thousands of people on his hands” over support for Israel (see 12.38pm) as “clearly inappropriate”.
Colleagues sitting behind Tahir Ali, a Birmingham Labour MP, could be seen shaking their heads during prime minister’s questions as he levelled the accusation against Sunak, who promptly replied: “That is the face of the changed Labour party.”
Asked about the comments, Starmer’s spokesperson said:
That language is clearly inappropriate and not language we would support or endorse …
This absolutely is a changed Labour party and you’ve seen that in the commitments that Keir Starmer has made in his leadership campaign and has followed through on during the course of his leadership.
However, the Conservative party quickly moved to weaponise the exchange, launching a clip on its official X account saying:
Same old Labour.
The only thing Keir Starmer has changed is his own position on everything he says.
Same old Labour.
— Conservatives (@Conservatives) January 24, 2024
The only thing Keir Starmer has changed is his own position on everything he says. pic.twitter.com/536LJYIG1g
Updated
Labour criticises government over figures showing cuts in police numbers
The government has cut the number of police officers serving in the unit responsible for smashing Channel smuggling gangs, according to figures released today.
Police workforce statistics published by the Home Office show that there has been a cut of 343 National Crime Agency officers, as well as cuts of 311 police officers, 611 PCSOs [police community support officers] and 511 special constables between March and September 2023.
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said:
On a day of more Tory infighting, these are bombshell statistics that show the Conservatives cannot be trusted to keep our streets or our borders safe.
Not content with cutting bobbies on the beat from our local communities, they are now cutting NCA officers too – the law enforcement body responsible for smashing the smuggling gangs operating in the Channel.
Rachel Harrison, national secretary of the GMB which represents PCSOs, said:
PCSO numbers are being cut to the bone and the number of police staff remains well below 2010 levels. There are shortfalls across staff groups – from 999 call handlers to scene of crime investigators.
These cuts are making our communities unsafe – it’s time for the government to invest in police staff.
Updated
Opposition parties demand disclosure of any Covid emails sent by Sturgeon from private SNP account
Opposition parties have demanded the full disclosure of any emails sent or received by Nicola Sturgeon using her Scottish National party address for government business, in what was allegedly “a clear and deliberate breach of protocol”.
The controversy erupted after the UK Covid inquiry released evidence from Prof Devi Sridhar, the Edinburgh University health expert who advised Sturgeon during the pandemic, that Sturgeon offered her “private” SNP email address, as well as her government address, with the words: “Don’t worry about protocol – tackling the virus more important than that.”
That disclosure has fuelled allegations that Sturgeon, who is due to give evidence to the inquiry in Edinburgh next week, routinely used her SNP account for sensitive government business to evade official scrutiny and sidestep freedom of information laws, as did her special advisers.
The inquiry is already investigating mounting evidence that her most senior officials deleted their WhatsApp messages to avoid FoI disclosures, and acknowledged doing so.
Jackie Baillie, Scottish Labour’s deputy leader, has written to John-Paul Marks, the permanent secretary at the Scottish government, calling for him to establish whether his officials had got hold of relevant SNP emails and handed them to the inquiry.
Baillie said using a party address in that way was “a clear and deliberate breach of protocol”. She went on:
This action means that important information regarding the pandemic may not be accessible to the public.
Indeed I have been told by former cabinet ministers that the use of SNP emails was widespread. I would therefore be grateful to know what information sent to SNP email accounts has been recovered by the Scottish government for the inquiry.
Separately, Craig Hoy, the Scottish Conservative chair, wrote to Sturgeon calling on her to “do the right thing” and release the material voluntarily.
The Scottish government and SNP have been asked for their responses.
Updated
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s press secretary also said that Rishi Sunak would not be distracted by Simon Clarke’s call for a new party leader. Asked about the Clarke article in the Telegraph, she said:
This is one MP. We recognise that he’s in a different place to some other MPs that have come out today. He’s entitled to his view but that won’t distract us from getting on with what matters to people.
No 10 hints Sunak open to reappointing Lee Anderson as Tory deputy chair despite rebellion over Rwanda bill
No 10 has hinted that Rishi Sunak is open to reappointing Lee Anderson as one of the Conservative party’s deputy chairs.
Anderson, a working-class rightwinger, resigned from his post two weeks ago because he wanted to defy the party whip and vote for “rebel” amendments to strengthen the Rwanda bill.
But he and Brendan Clarke-Smith, who also resigned as a Tory deputy chair for the same reasons, issued a remarkably conciliatory resignation letter, stating their “100% support” for Sunak.
Anderson has now told the Daily Telegraph that he should have voted for the Rwanda bill at third reading, instead of abstaining, and that he would like his Tory deputy chair job back.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing, asked if Sunak would reappoint him, the PM’s press secretary said it was “the PM’s prerogative to choose and when” who gets which jobs. She went on:
I think we can say that we have a lot of time for Lee. He made it clear that he had concerns but actually he really supports getting this deterrent up and running so it’s good to see him talking about that today.
PMQs - snap verdict
That PMQs, or at least the Sunak/Starmer section, was even more cantankerous and unilluminating than usual. There were moments when genuine contempt, as opposed to professional, political hostility, seemed to be showing through. For anyone who aspires to a more uplifting politics, bad news: there may be 10 more months of this.
But there are always some takeaways to excavate, and the first is one that might count as good news for Sunak; no Tory stood up to support Simon Clarke. Judging by comments on airwaves, on social media and in private WhatsApp groups, the Clarke attempted coup (if that is what it even was) had fizzled out before PMQs even started (at least for now). Sunak did not come under attack from his own MPs, as Theresa May and Boris Johnson did at PMQs when they were near the departure door. So, for Sunak, it could have been worse.
Starmer, of course, raised the Clarke article. Two weeks ago, after Starmer claimed at PMQs that Sunak was someone who “simply doesn’t get Britain”, some rightwingers, including the former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi, accused Starmer of a dog whistle racist slur. The allegation never gained much traction, but now we definitely won’t be hearing it again because what Starmer said was repeated, almost word for word, by Clarke in his Telegraph article today. He wrote:
Rishi has great strengths. He is decent to his core, fiercely intelligent and works formidably hard.
I saw these strengths up close whilst chief secretary to the Treasury when he was chancellor.
But these strengths cannot compensate for two fundamental problems. He does not get what Britain needs. And he is not listening to what the British people want.
Starmer must have been aware of this as he quoted Clarke in his opening question.
The prime minister has had quite a week. From endlessly fighting with his own MPs to collapsing in laughter when he was asked by a member of the public about NHS waiting lists … The only thing missing from that punishing schedule is any sort of governing or leadership. So was he surprised to see one of his own MPs say that he doesn’t get what Britain needs and he’s not listening to what people want?
Starmer is getting better and better at using ridicule as a weapon against Sunak, and today was another polished performance. “One-man Pollyanna show” was a particularly good line (although only to those who get the reference). It was interesting to hear Starmer attack Sunak over his career as a hedge fund investor before he became MP, saying he made millions “betting on the misery of working people”, but this line may not work effectively because most people don’t know very much about what Sunak was doing in his pre-Commons career, or what hedge funds actually do anyway.
Starmer only properly got on to a policy issue with his fourth question, where he asked about Monday’s Times report saying “thousands of parents have been warned they will be unable to access the government’s flagship free-childcare offer this year because of issues with the rollout”. He linked this to the “out of touch” critique by arguing that Sunak did not really appreciate the impact this might have on working people, but after so much broad-brush knockabout at the start, these questions did not have as much impact as they might have done if he had asked them straight. However, he did somehow get the speaker to let him get away with calling the government’s record a “shitshow” (presumably because he was quoting the Times).
From Sunak, we got almost the entire repertoire of the CCHQ anti-Starmer story, starting with a retro culture wars broadside.
[Starmer] talks about what Britain needs, what Britain wants, what Britain values. This from a man who takes the knee, who wanted to abolish the monarchy, who still doesn’t know what a woman is, and who just this week, one of his frontbenchers, said that they backed teaching divisive white privilege in our schools. Looking at his record, it’s crystal clear which one of us doesn’t get Britain’s values.
No doubt there are some voters who buy this stuff, but mostly it sounds a bit desperate. Sunak was stronger ground when he attacked Starmer over the £28bn green jobs pledge, which the Tories are depicting as a tax commitment. Starmer has insisted that he won’t put up taxes to fund it, but Labour has also said it won’t break its borrowing fiscal rules to fund it either, and there are probably quite a few takers for Sunak’s sceptical take.
We do know that he is committed to his 2030 decarbonisation promise, which they say will cost £28bn but I was reading about it this week. He says he has changed the party, one of his team called it an albatross hanging around their neck, that might have been the shadow chancellor maybe, but he said they are doubling down on it.
All this ahead of a crunch meeting we are told this week for them to work out how they are going to pay for it. I can save them some time because we all know the answer, higher taxes for the British people.
Sunak is almost certainly not a great Guardian reader, but he was quoting our story from last week. It remains to be seen whether Labour feels confident about its ability to refute 10 more months of this, or whether there is going to be a policy clarification.
Updated
Labour MP Tahir Ali claims Sunak has 'blood of thousands on his hands' because of his support for Israel
Tahir Ali (Lab) says the government has said Israel respects international law while internal government documents show Foreign Office officials do not believe this. He says this means the PM has the blood of innocent people on his hands.
Sunak says Ali’s comment suggests Labour has not really changed, despite Starmer’s claims.
UPDATE: Ali said:
Recently released documents reveal that the Foreign Office had serious concerns about Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law and its ongoing assault on Gaza.
This assessment was hidden from parliament whilst the prime minister boldly stated his confidence in Israel’s respect for international law.
Since then, the scale of Israel’s war crimes in Gaza have been revealed to the world thanks to South Africa’s case to the ICJ.
Therefore, is it now not the time for the prime minister to admit that he has the blood of thousands of innocent people on his hands and for him to commit to demanding an immediate ceasefire and an ending of UK’s arms trade with Israel?
And Sunak replied:
That’s the face of the changed Labour party.
Updated
Miriam Cates (Con) asks about the report of a 14-year-old girl who took her life following bullying on social media. Will the government consider banning social media, and perhaps even smart phones, for under-16s?
Last month Bloomberg reported that Sunak was considering this plan.
Sunak says the Online Safety Act will protect children from harmful content. Ofcom is consulting on the guidance for this. If firms don’t act, they could face fines of 10% of total turnout.
Updated
Theresa May, the former PM, asks about type 1 diabetes. Will the government act on a report she published on this yesterday.
Sunak commends May for her work on this issue and says her recommendations will be considered.
Updated
Layla Moran (Lib Dem) says Thames Water is a shambles. Its service has been shoddy, but they are putting bills up by 60%. Why should people pay for their incompetence?
Sunak says the volume of sewage discharges by water companies is unacceptable.
Mark Menzies (Con) asks about progress on the South Fylde rail line.
Sunak says he knows the rail minister is looking at this.
Alex Norris (Lab) says daily chaos in government is leaving widespread destitution unaddressed.
Sunak says he does not want to see anyone relying on food banks. But the government is making progress. Inflation has been halved, he says, claiming Labour opposed the measures that made this possible.
Updated
Debbie Abrahams (Lab) asks about figures suggesting that inequality has led to 1 million premature deaths.
Sunak says the government is committed to caring for the most vulnerable people in society.
Updated
Liz Twist (Lab) asks about yesterday’s Rowntree report on poverty, and asks where rising child poverty fits into Sunak’s plan.
Sunak claims there are 1.7 million fewer people in poverty.
(He is quoting the absolute poverty figures, not the relative poverty ones, which are generally seen as a better measure.)
Updated
Sheryll Murray (Con) asks about the need for a footbridge at Lostwithiel station.
Sunak says the Department for Transport is looking at this.
Colum Eastwood, the SDLP leader, asks if the UK will vote for a ceasefire in Gaza the next time this is debated at the UN.
Sunak says the government will consider UN resolutions on their merits. But a ceasefire needs to be sustainable. Hamas needs to release hostages, it needs to be no longer in charge of Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority needs to return to take charge.
Updated
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, asks about footage shown on ITV of an unarmed Palestinian man carrying a white flag being shot by the IDF. That’s a war crime, isn’t it?
Sunak says the government has said Israel should follow international law.
Flynn says MPs should respond with the same urgency to this ITV news report as they responded to the ITV drama about the Post Office.
Sunak says the government is working to create the conditions for a sustainable ceasefire.
Updated
John Penrose (Con) asks about plans for an international anti-corruption court.
Sunak says the Foreign Office is looking at this.
Starmer says parents cannot plan their childcare. He says Sunak calls this a technical issue. But Starmer says he prefers the words of the Tory who briefed the Times this was a “complete shitshow”. He goes on:
When will the prime minister finally realise that the biggest practical issue facing Britain is the constant farcical incompetence of the government that he leads?
Sunak says his plan is working. Labour’s “£28bn tax grab” will take Britain back to square one, he says.
Starmer says Sunak did not answer the childcare question. Eight weeks before it is due to start, parents cannot plan. This is another example of Sunak not understanding how life works for people.
Sunak says the Tories are delivering childcare. Starmer does not have a plan for his £28bn pledge. He says he will not do extra borrowing. So taxes will go up, he says.
Rishi Sunak is being bullied by his own party, Keir Starmer says
Starmer says he has changed his party, while Sunak is being bullied by his. He asks when thousands of parents will get the childcare they were promised.
[Sunak] can try and blame the Labour party all he wants, the difference is I have changed my party, he is bullied by his party.
Has he found the time in his busy schedule to work out why thousands of parents are being told by their nurseries that they won’t get free childcare that he promised them?
Sunak says Labour are meant to be having a crunch meeting on how they will pay for their £28bn green pledge. But we all know how, he says. By raising taxes.
Updated
Starmer says, when he was DPP, Sunak was making millions “betting on the misery of millions”.
Sunak says Starmer does not have a plan. He quotes the Labour MP Jon Cruddas and Steve Coogan. Starmer is a human weathervane, he says.
Starmer says Sunak is a “one-man Pollyanna show”. He asks again if Sunak knows why people think he does not get it.
Sunak doubles down on what he said before. He says Starmer “chose to represent a now proscribed terrorist group”, he “chose to campaign against the deportation of foreign nationals” and he chose to serve Jeremy Corbyn.
Updated
Keir Starmer starts by joining the PM in his comments about the king and the Princess of Wales, and about Holocaust memorial day. And he pays tribute again to Sir Tony Lloyd.
Turning to party politics, he says the PM has had quite a week. He collapsed in laughter when asked about NHS waiting lists.
Tory MPs shout withdraw; they believe Sunak was misrepresented in the video circulating online.
Starmer says he loves the way, the more Tory MPs criticise him in private, the more they support him in public.
So was he surprised to hear one of his MPs (Simon Clarke) say Sunak does not get what people want?
Sunak says Starmer takes the knee, wants to abolish the monarchy, and does not know what a woman is.
Updated
Sunak confirms he is opposed to Royal Mail cutting number of delivery days
Richard Thomson (SNP) says people will be alarmed by reports the Royal Mail will be allowed to cut the number of delivery days.
Sunak says he agrees and the government is committed to ensuring the universal service obligation “remains as it is”.
Rishi Sunak starts by saying MPs will want to offer their best wishes to the king and the Princess of Wales (who are both ill). And he says this afternoon he will be meeting a Holocaust survivor.
Updated
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question at PMQs.
There is not a single comment supporting Simon Clarke on the Tory MPs’ WhatsApp group, Pippa Crerar reports.
Tory MPs say there is not a single supportive comment for Simon Clarke on their whatsapp group...
But one tells me: “Plenty of us share his analysis of Sunak we just know it would be electoral suicide to have yet another leadership contest”.
Tory MPs say there is not a single supportive comment for Simon Clarke on their whatsapp group...
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) January 24, 2024
But one tells me: "Plenty of us share his analysis of Sunak we just know it would be electoral suicide to have yet another leadership contest".
Sunak faces Starmer at PMQs
Rishi Sunak will be taking PMQs very soon.
What commentators are saying about the Tories and Simon Clarke's bid to topple Sunak
This is what some commentators are saying about the situation in the Conservative party following Simon Clarke’s call for Rishi Sunak’s resignation.
David Gauke, the former Tory cabinet minister, says in the New Statesman that what Clarke is really trying to do is ensure Sunak gets the blame for the party’s election defeat. He says:
Let us fast forward to, say, 15 November and a heavy Conservative defeat. The first instinct of any party in these circumstances is to attribute blame. Where to start? Boris Johnson and Partygate? No, it cannot be that – at least not in the eyes of Johnson loyalists such as Clarke. What about Liz Truss and the mini-budget? Certainly not, says Sir Simon, the Truss enthusiast. He might, just as he did in his Telegraph article, graciously acknowledge that Sunak is “far from solely responsible for our present predicament” (a phrase that is doing an awful lot of work) but, yes, it was really all Sunak’s fault. He was unclear, beholden to convention, soft on immigration, too accepting of international law, and lacking in the vision to deliver tax, welfare, planning and public services reform. Damn it, man. He is just not Conservative enough …
Clarke cannot seriously believe he is going to win the argument that now is the time for another change of leader. But, at the very least, he is laying down a marker for the argument to come about who takes responsibility for an election defeat and how the Conservative party changes as a consequence. At that point, he might be very confident that his view may well prevail. Scapegoating Sunak is what this is really all about.
Isabel Hardman at the Spectator says some other Tory MPs are expected to follow Simon Clarke in calling for Rishi Sunak to go. She says:
For all the whips’ efforts, there are other Conservative MPs who are planning to join Clarke, hence his line in his piece about ‘every Conservative MP will need to live with the decision they make in the coming days for the rest of their lives’. It’s not clear how many MPs this will be, though a handful have told colleagues that they are preparing to do so. As Katy Balls says, the intervention has so far served to solidify Sunak’s position within the party, but that doesn’t mean that there won’t continue to be storm damage from unhappy MPs. That said, the party has been so manifestly split and ill-disciplined for so long that it probably won’t make much difference to the way voters view the Tories.
And Katy Balls at the Spectator says, while the rebels do not have the numbers to topple Sunak, they are damaging the party. She says:
As I say in this week’s magazine, while regicide is in the air, most think the Tory rebels are nowhere near the numbers and instead are more likely to embark on a coup that fails and hurts the party in the meantime. ‘There are some serious Hoon/Hewitt-type morons around at the moment,’ says a recent departee of No 10.
The immediate problem for Sunak is that this just reinforces the idea that the Tory party is more serious about infighting than winning. As a minister puts it: ‘You have two irreconcilable groups: one who thinks the bad polls are down to psychodrama and infighting the other that thinks it’s down to Sunak and the government.’ The only comfort for Sunak right now is that as things stand the first group is much larger than the latter.
Stephen Bush in the Financial Times dismisses the polling quoted by the Telegraph, in its story about Clarke, suggesting a new Tory leader would be more popular than Keir Starmer. He says:
While the polling shows Starmer beating Sunak on the question of which of the two men voters prefer for prime minister, the Labour leader falls behind in a head-to-head with an imagined “new Tory leader”. The survey did not present respondents with names of possible alternative Tory leaders, but asked who they would prefer: “Starmer or a hypothetical Conservative candidate who meets the following description: stronger on crime and migration, who cut taxes and got NHS waiting lists down.”
I mean, really, why stop there? If you’re going to poll Starmer’s performance against a Conservative leader who improves public services, cuts taxes and lowers immigration, why not go the whole hog and ask how voters would act if Starmer faced a Conservative prime minister who cured cancer, resolved my long-running dispute with Wickes over my bathroom renovation, gave everyone in the UK a million pounds tax-free and scored the winning goal in the World Cup final? Of course Sunak does worse against Starmer than an imagined, perfect ideal of a Conservative prime minister.
And Paul Goodman at ConservativeHome agrees, adding that there is no crisis for No 10 this morning. He says:
A poll that compared Sunak’s performance against Sir Keir to, say, Kemi Badenoch’s, Penny Mordaunt’s and James Cleverly’s might tell us something worth knowing. This nugatory exercise does not.
The Telegraph somewhat downplays the poll, at least compared to its presentation last week. It isn’t pushed in headlines online, nor has similar space been cleared for it.
The paper offers its readers a nice selection of potential leadership runners and riders, kindly quoting this site’s survey, diminished only by the fact that three of them are presently ineligible.
All in all, there is no crisis for Downing Street this morning, but were more Tory MPs to follow Sir Simon’s lead in a purposeful way, and to interact with those gnomic donors, that could change.
Updated
And Christopher Hope from GB News quotes a figure from the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee saying Simon Clarke’s attempt to defenestrate Rishi Sunak has flopped.
LATEST on fall-out from Simon Clarke’s call for the PM to go.
One 1922 figure tells me: “It seems to have fizzled already. Most of the people you could imagine putting a letter in have posted support for the PM in the WhatsApp group. This coup won’t have lasted 24 hours.”
LATEST on fall-out from Simon Clarke’s call for the PM to go.
— Christopher Hope📝 (@christopherhope) January 24, 2024
One 1922 figure tells me: “It seems to have fizzled already. Most of the people you could imagine putting a letter in have posted support for the PM in the WhatsApp group. This coup won’t have lasted 24 hours.”
Jason Groves from the Daily Mail says he expects Simon Clarke will be disinvited from next month’s launch of the Popular Conservatism group. (See 10.32am.)
Sounds like Simon Clarke will be dropped from next month's Popular Conservatism launch after last night's call for the PM to quit https://t.co/2P0kxTPCO3
— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) January 24, 2024
After PMQs there will be a Commons urgent question on resilience in the light of the recent storms. Labour has tabled it, and a Cabinet Office minister will respond.
Labour says Amazon and eBay bosses could be prosecuted for selling dangerous knives online under its planned crackdown
Labour would prosecute Amazon executives if they continued to allow dangerous knives to be sold on their platform, Keir Starmer has said this morning.
He made the announcement in a press release in which he said that, despite repeated promises by the government to ban “zombie knives”, a full ban has still not been implemented.
Starmer said knife crime was up by 70% since 2015 and he said Labour would implement a proper crackdown.
In its news release, Labour said:
Five months ago, Labour supported the government’s pledge to introduce new legislation to toughen the rules on possession of machetes and zombie-style knives. There has been no action since, only warnings from experts that the proposals are too weak by excluding weapons like ninja swords.
The government has published 16 press releases about zombie knives since 2015, yet despite repeated promises to toughen the rules, a full ban is still not in place …
Labour is going further by also pledging a crackdown on the sale of dangerous knives online. Rambo knives, swords and machetes are all too easily available through sites such as Knife Warehouse. Recent high-profile murder cases, such as the killing of Ronan Kanda, have shown verification measures such as ID checks have been easily subverted.
Labour has also long called for tough criminal sanctions on tech executives who allow knife sales on their online marketplaces, such as Amazon Marketplace, eBay and Instagram. This follows a Which investigation that identified repeated examples of knives for sale on these decentralised platforms, often listed by individual sellers abroad (e.g. the USA). In the Online Safety Act, the government simply opted for Ofcom fines for such breaches – but still hasn’t put that measure into force.
And Starmer said:
The number of these deadly weapons on Britain’s streets is terrifying, and unacceptable.
For years, the Tories have made grand promises of action, but by failing to bring a proper ban on these killer knives and to crack down on online sales to kids, they’re letting a generation down …
Labour will act. There will be nothing short of a ban by my Labour government. And we won’t stop there – we’ll crack down on online sales, too. No child should be able to buy a deadly weapon as easily as they can online today.
Updated
In posts on X, Beth Rigby, the Sky News political editor, says that even though Tory MPs are not supporting Simon Clarke in public, in private the mood is febrile.
We reported ‘several’ no confidence letters in after Rwanda vote @SimonClarkeMP 2nd MP to publicly call for PM to go in order to ‘avoid election massacre’ He’s been rebuked by Fox, Patel, Davis. But Tory source tells me Clarke only saying “what everyone knows but won’t say out…
— Beth Rigby (@BethRigby) January 24, 2024
We reported ‘several’ no confidence letters in after Rwanda vote @SimonClarkeMP 2nd MP to publicly call for PM to go in order to ‘avoid election massacre’ He’s been rebuked by Fox, Patel, Davis. But Tory source tells me Clarke only saying “what everyone knows but won’t say out loud” & says scores of MPs privately agree 1/
But no sense to this picking up momentum. Sources say Clarke took decision alone cos he wants “to be honest & open about talks which been in private for months”. Another MP tells me says this being driven by handful of MPs in ‘five families grouping’ and it’s an “operation like one of those farmyard vehicles, which just spends time spreading muck everywhere…” 2/
But amongst MPs in marginal seats, am told there’s lots of ‘chatter’ & circulation of Franklin piece on @ConHome
Senior MP on right tells me 2 by-elex Feb 15 could be a ‘watershed moment’: “If we get slaughtered, the herd might well panic” > it’s very febrile
Rigby is referring to this article by Peter Franklin published on ConservativeHome yesterday. In it, Franklin says he used to think it was too late for another leadership contest before the election but has changed his mind. Here’s an extract.
To insist that Sunak remains in place means assuming one of two things: firstly, that his basic political strategy is commensurate with the challenges facing us a party; or, secondly, that he can successfully execute a change of direction. If, in either respect, that is what you do believe then I’d love to see your evidence; but if you don’t, then what possible reason could there be for sticking with Sunak?
Well, there is one justification. It rests upon the fatalistic assumption that it’s too late to avoid defeat: changing strategies won’t work, nor will changing leaders. We’re therefore better off having the next leadership contest — and a fundamental rethink — in opposition.
Until recently, that’s what I thought too. But then I remembered Lyndon B Johnson’s first rule of politics: “learn to count.” A leadership contest before the general election would be hurried, but at least there’d be 346 Conservative MPs (who haven’t been leader before) to choose from. But how long would this long-list be after the election? 200? 100? 50? As things stand, none of those numbers is out of the question, (though I’d admit that 200 is pushing the bounds of plausibility).
Home Office U-turns on policy to restrict help for trafficking victims
The Home Office has performed a U-turn on a policy to deprive some modern slavery victims of protection from traffickers, Diane Taylor reports.
David Cameron should face questions from MPs in Commons chamber, procedure committee recommends
Ministers have been urged to back an obscure compromise so that David Cameron can be scrutinised in the House of Commons despite not being an MP, PA Media reports.
The story is based on this report from the procedure committee which points out that, if Cameron were invited to take questions from MPs at the “bar” of the Commons (the thick line in the carpet, near the entrance, which marks the formal entrance to the chamber), he would be following in the footsteps of the Duke of Wellington. It says:
Until the first part of the 19th century, important inquiries were entrusted to committees of the whole house, with witnesses examined at the bar. Members of the Lords, while providing evidence, were given chairs within the bar but stood to answer questions. Indeed, there are several precedents for members of the Lords addressing the Commons directly from within the bar, as did Lord Melville in 1805, and the Duke of Wellington in 1814.
Nowadays, witnesses provide evidence to inquiries overseen by select committees. It has been more than 60 years since a non-member appeared at the bar of the house; the last instance was in 1957, when the journalist John Junor was admonished.
The government says it will consider the recommendation. But when Cameron, and No 10, have been asked about this issue, they have always insisted that Cameron is accountable anyway, because he takes questions from peers and from the Commons foreign affairs committee, and that Labour cabinet ministers in the Lords did not appear at the bar of the Commons chamber. It sounds like the recommendation will be shelved.
Updated
Minister rejects claim Clarke's article linked to a 'plot' to get rid of Sunak
On the Today programme this morning Nick Robinson asked Kevin Hollinrake, the postal services minister, if he thought the Simon Clarke article was evidence of a “plot” to remove Rishi Sunak, or “an attempt of a coup”. Hollinrake gave a clear answer: “No, not at all.”
Clarke himself has denied acting on behalf of someone else with leadership ambitions. And sources close to Liz Truss have been telling journalists this morning that she did know that this article was coming, and does not support it. “God knows what he’s up to,” said one
But do we really believe that the article appeared out of the blue, and that Clarke just happened to ring up the Telegraph yesterday to offer his article unprompted? Here are five reasons to think that it is not that simple, and that some sort of plot is afoot.
1) Clarke published his article only a week after expensive polling was published showing the Conservatives on course for a landslide defeat. YouGov says the polling was commissioned by Lord Frost, the former Brexit minister, and paid for by “the Conservative Britain Alliance”, a mysterious organisation apparently comprising party donors. No one has said who they are. We don’t know for sure why they put up the money (reportedly, a hefty five-figure sum), but it seems unlikely that they are disinterested psephologists.
2) The Telegraph wrote up the poll findings in a way that supports the view that changing the party leader would make a difference. News organisations often present polling in a subjective manner, but this was quite an extreme example – prompting YouGov to disown the Telegraph’s interpretation. Not for the first time, the paper seems to be shaping Conservative politics, not just reporting it.
3) Another tranche of polling has been published by the Telegraph today to back up Clarke’s argument. In its story on the Clarke article, the paper says:
A YouGov poll of 13,000 voters suggests that a new Tory leader, championing core Conservative values, could secure a convincing victory over Labour.
When people were asked who they would prefer as prime minister – Sir Keir or a new, tax-cutting Tory leader with a tougher approach to legal and illegal migration – voters in 322 constituencies in England and Wales preferred a new Tory leader, while Sir Keir came out on top in only 164 seats.
In 89 constituencies the most common answer was “not sure”. If the “not sure” respondents are stripped out, a new Tory is most popular in 375 constituencies to 200 …
The poll did not present respondents with names of possible alternative Tory leaders, but asked if they would prefer as prime minister: Sir Keir or a new Tory leader who was stronger on crime and migration, who cut taxes and got NHS waiting lists down.
This seems to be a finding from the YouGov MRP poll published last week. But why was it saved up for use alongside an article from an MP calling for a new leader, unless the paper was sure this was coming?
4) The Clarke article includes a phrase that suggests it was written for publication after January. This point has been raised by Christopher Hope, the GB News political editor, who posted these on X.
Clarke references the MRP poll in his @Telegraph op-ed tonight: “In January, the Telegraph’s YouGov MRP poll showed that were an election to be held, the Conservatives would fall from our current 350 MPs to 169, just four more seats than Sir John held in 1997.”
What is odd is that Clarke says “in January” in his @Telegraph article. Was this piece originally written with a view to it being published next month? Perhaps after a possible double by-election defeat on Feb 15th?
5) Next month Clarke is due to join Liz Truss at the launch of a new group, Popular Conservatism, dedicated to restoring “democratic accountability to Britain” (code for getting rid of PMs who have not been elected by party members, or the electorate at large?) and delivering “popular conservative policies”. This does not sound like an effort to shore up Sunak.
Popular Conservatism is launching in central London on Tuesday 6th February.
— Liz Truss (@trussliz) January 22, 2024
If you’d like to join me, @Jacob_Rees_Mogg, @SimonClarkeMP, @ranil and others, please visit https://t.co/pKpduKS8FQ to register. pic.twitter.com/1ghRVO9xCz
Updated
Clarke says his call for Sunak to go 'emphatically' not motivated by leadership ambitions, his or anyone else's
Last night Simon Clarke posted messages on X responding to the criticism he was getting from colleagues over his Telegraph article. He said “emphatically” that his call for Rishi Sunak to go was not motivated by a desire to secure the party leadership for himself, or for someone else.
I know I will be attacked for saying this.
— Simon Clarke MP (@SimonClarkeMP) January 23, 2024
Perhaps even accused of positioning myself or on behalf of another — emphatically neither of which I am doing.
I am speaking out because the stakes for our country and my party are too high to stay silent.https://t.co/oMITm2Mi7N
I know I will be attacked for saying this.
Perhaps even accused of positioning myself or on behalf of another — emphatically neither of which I am doing.
I am speaking out because the stakes for our country and my party are too high to stay silent
Every Conservative MP will need to live with the decision they make in the coming days for the rest of their lives.
Failing to act would itself represent a decision.
Look at the polls.
Personal insults don’t change the facts.
I have no further comment to make.
Tory MPs, and wider party, 'overwhelmingly' support Sunak, minister claims
No 10 has not responded to the Simon Clarke article, but Kevin Hollinrake, the postal services minister, and someone who has had a friendly relationship with Rishi Sunak for years, was doing the broadcast round this morning and he said Conservative MPs overwhelmingly disagreed with what Clarke said. He told Times Radio:
I don’t think [Clarke’s] right. I think the parliamentary party and the wider party is overwhelmingly in support of the prime minister. Quite rightly too. I don’t agree, I don’t think Simon’s right on this …
Of course, some people panic at a difficult time, but this is not the overwhelming view of the party.
Updated
As Eleni Courea reports, in private Conservatives have been even more critical of Simon Clarke than the former ministers who have been criticising him on X. She says:
Speaking privately, other Tory MPs were even more forthright. “Not sure we should be taking top tips on leadership from Liz Truss’s right hand,” one minister told the Guardian.
“What the bloody hell is Simon Clarke doing?” said a Tory MP who backed Truss in the 2022 leadership contest.
Another Tory MP said: “Simon Clarke hasn’t helped himself, the party, his country or any of his colleagues tonight – only [Keir] Starmer. He needs to go home, have a lie down in a dark room and repeatedly say ‘I must take the fight to Labour’ until it finally sinks in.”
A senior Tory official said of Clarke: “If he wants to help Sir Keir become the next PM he should just cross the floor.”
‘This is getting silly’: senior Tories criticise Simon Clarke after he calls for Sunak’s resignation
Good morning. Until last night, the only Conservative MP publicly calling for Rishi Sunak to resign was Dame Andrea Jenkyns, a Boris Johnson acolyte who spent three and a half months as a junior minister. Even lobby correspondents would draw the line at calling her a “senior Tory” and no one paid much attention. But last night Sir Simon Clarke, who has served in cabinet under two prime ministers and who is not widely viewed as a crank, joined in, publishing an article in the Daily Telegraph saying the Tories should ditch Sunak before the general election.
Potentially, this takes the Conservative leadership crisis into new territory. Clarke is close to Liz Truss, the former PM, who is about to launch a new group called Popular Conservatism (sic), or PopCon. It does not seem committed to supporting Sunak’s leadership. Perhaps more importantly, Clarke seems to have the backing of an even more important player in Tory politics: the Daily Telegraph.
But … the early indications are that this could fail just as dismally as the Geoff Hoon/Patricia Hewitt “coup” against Gordon Brown in 2010. Clarke does not seem to have any Conservative MPs clambering out of the trenches behind him, and some proper senior Tories have lined up to attack him.
Priti Patel, the former home secretary, has accused him of “facile and divisive self-indulgence”.
At this critical time for our country, with challenges at home and abroad, our party must focus on the people we serve and deliver for the country. Engaging in facile and divisive self indulgence only serves our opponents, it’s time to unite and get on with the job.
At this critical time for our country, with challenges at home and abroad, our party must focus on the people we serve and deliver for the country. Engaging in facile and divisive self indulgence only serves our opponents, it’s time to unite and get on with the job.
— Priti Patel MP (@pritipatel) January 23, 2024
Liam Fox, the former international trade secretary, says Clarke’s initiative makes a big defeat more likely.
This is not the time for self indulgence and tribalism in the party. Those who have an agenda to destabilise the government in an election year should understand the consequences. Having been on the front bench for all 13 years in opposition, it is a miserable place. Be warned.
This is not the time for self indulgence and tribalism in the party. Those who have an agenda to destabilise the government in an election year should understand the consequences. Having been on the front bench for all 13 years in opposition, it is a miserable place. Be warned.
— Liam Fox MP (@LiamFox) January 23, 2024
David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, says Clarke is just being silly.
This is getting silly.
The Party and the country are sick and tired of MPs putting their own leadership ambitions ahead of the UK’s best interests.
This is getting silly.
— David Davis (@DavidDavisMP) January 23, 2024
The Party and the country are sick and tired of MPs putting their own leadership ambitions ahead of the UK's best interests. https://t.co/kmkXco6hMc
It is really about time that these people realise they have a duty to the country that is greater than their personal leadership ambitions.
It is really about time that these people realise they have a duty to the country that is greater than their personal leadership ambitions.
— David Davis (@DavidDavisMP) January 23, 2024
And Ben Wallace, the former defence secretary, said:
My colleague Sir Simon Clarke MP is wrong. The way to win the next election is to tackle inflation and grow the economy.
Rishi is doing just that. Division and another PM would lead to the certain loss of power. We need to focus on delivering for the public not divisive rowing.
And the opposition parties can’t believe their luck. This is from Pat McFadden, Labour’s national campaign coordinator.
Labour will focus on serving the British people whilst the Tories form another circular firing squad.
There are many good reasons for getting rid of this clapped out Conservative government and liberating the British people from endless bouts of Tory infighting is certainly one of them.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Noon: Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.
After 12.45pm: MPs debate all stages of the Northern Ireland (executive formation) bill, which gives more time for a power-sharing executive to be formed before elections have to be held because it has not happened.
Afternoon: MPs hold a general debate “on the situation in the Red Sea”.
If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a laptop or a desktop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line; privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate); or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
Updated
