Afternoon summary
Countries agree international network of AI safety institutes at AI Seoul summit co-chaired by Sunak (remotely)
Ten nations and the European Union have agreed to establish an international network of publicly backed AI safety institutes to advance global research and testing of AI, PA Media reports. PA says:
Rishi Sunak said the agreement would mean “international progress” could be made on AI safety, after it was announced at the end of the first day of the AI Seoul Summit.
The UK announced it would create the world’s first AI safety institute during the AI Safety Summit held at Bletchley Park in November last year, to carry out research and voluntary evaluation and testing of AI models, with a number of other countries since announcing their own domestic institutes.
The newly signed “Seoul Statement of Intent toward International Cooperation on AI Safety Science” will see the network of institutes share research, including details about models they have studied, with the aim of advancing global understanding of the science around artificial intelligence.
Alongside the UK, the United States, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and the EU signed the agreement, but one global AI powerhouse – China – was notably absent, and was not represented during the virtual meeting hosted by Sunak and South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol.
Andrew Mitchell, the deputy foreign secretary, told the Commons business committee that the government is considering giving MPs more detail about the process by which it authorises arms exports to Israel, on the basis that they won’t be used to commit breaches of international humanitarian law (IHL), Patrick Wintour reports.
Andrew Mitchell, the deputy foreign secretary says in light of concern about Israeli arms export process he will "look to see what more detail we can offer in writing about IHL assessment both in terms of process and substance" Says he will come come back to parliament, and the…
— Patrick Wintour (@patrickwintour) May 21, 2024
Andrew Mitchell, the deputy foreign secretary says in light of concern about Israeli arms export process he will “look to see what more detail we can offer in writing about IHL assessment both in terms of process and substance” Says he will come come back to parliament, and the business committee. Appears to be offering a version or summary of the advice, something ministers have hitherto opposed.
Just Stop Oil, one of the protest groups singled out for particular criticism in John Woodcock’s report today on political extremism, has issued a statement saying it’s the government and its supporters who are the “real criminals”.
Referring to Woodcock’s role with an organisation run by a firm with oil company and arms firm clients, a spokesperson for Just Stop Oil said Woodcock was “entirely compromised” because of the conflict of interest. The spokesperson went on:
As such, Just Stop Oil does not recognise the legitimacy of this report.
The governments’ climate strategy has been declared unlawful for the second time and their response has been to licence yet more oil, as our climate spins out of control. Who are we going to sue for the inconvenience of flooded fields, crop failure, spiralling food costs and empty shelves?
Just this morning, the high court has ruled that Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful direct action. [See 11.18am.] History will come to regard the acts of this government and its cronies as the real criminals, which is why they will stop at nothing to silence those telling the truth and acting like we are in the emergency that we are in.
Woodcock has rejected claims that he was biased and insisted that he applied an “objective standard” when writing his report.
David Cameron, the foreign secretary, told peers this afternoon that he thought the decision by the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court (ICC) to seek arrest warrants for the Israeli PM and Hamas leaders was a mistake.
Speaking during his regular question session in the House of Lords, Cameron said:
I don’t believe for one moment that seeking these warrants is going to help get the hostages out, it’s not going to help get aid in and it’s not going to help deliver a sustainable ceasefire.
As we have said from the outset, because Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute and because Palestine is not yet recognised as a state we don’t think that the court has jurisdiction in this area.
Frankly I think this was a mistake in terms of position, in terms of timing, in terms of effect.
To draw moral equivalence between the Hamas leadership and the democratically elected leader of Israel I think is just plain wrong.
Robert Colvile, who runs the Centre for Policy Studies, a Tory thinktank, has welcomed at least one aspect of Angela Rayner’s speech on housing and new towns this morning. (See 12.30pm.)
It is great to see that @AngelaRayner's housing announcement focuses so much on beauty/quality of buildings. An agenda pushed and made cross-party by many, but particular credit to comrades Alex Morton, @boys_nicholas & @SCP_Hughes
— Robert Colvile (@rcolvile) May 21, 2024
It is great to see that @AngelaRayner‘s housing announcement focuses so much on beauty/quality of buildings. An agenda pushed and made cross-party by many, but particular credit to comrades Alex Morton, @boys_nicholas & @SCP_Hughes
Civil servants worried work on arms sales to Israel could breach international law, PCS union says
Dozens of civil servants are seeking to escalate possible legal action against the government which will allow them to avoid helping to arm Israel, a union has claimed.
The head of PCS union says that members in the Department for Business and Trade are concerned that they may be culpable in acts of genocide in Gaza if they assist in issuing arms licenses.
The clamour for legal action has increased since the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes, a spokesperson for the union said.
“Given the ICC’s pursuit of Israel’s leaders, dozens of staff are now concerned that they are being asked to break international law,” the spokesperson said.
Fran Heathcote, the general secretary of the PCS union, is saying in a speech to members this afternoon:
Our members in BEIS London South branch and the newly formed DBT department, that are responsible for arms licensing, brought this issue to the union’s attention and raised concerns that the British government may be culpable in acts of genocide.
We are currently in talks with our lawyers to explore a potential judicial review to halt this work in its tracks.
The union has been asking ministers for its legal advice on arming Israel since January, when a preliminary ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found Israel’s acts in Gaza could amount to genocide.
A government spokesperson said:
As part of the government’s robust arms export control regime we regularly review advice on Israel’s commitment to international humanitarian law, and ministers act in accordance with that advice. At no point have any civil servants been asked to do anything in breach of the civil service code.
Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, condemned the organisers of the recent pro-Palestinian marches in his speech this morning, claiming they were not doing enough to stop antisemitic protesters “promoting hate”. (See 10.33am.)
In response, Ben Jamal, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, one of the groups organising the marches, claimed it was Gove who was the extremist.
Nobody truly committed to anti-racism and to suppressing hatred is going to take any lessons from Michael Gove … That he should choose to issue his speech at a moment when Israel is on trial in the world’s highest court for the crime of genocide and the day after its leader has been threatened with arrest warrants for war crimes from the ICC, is grotesque, but given his track record, unsurprising.
He should be devoting his energies at the moment to ensuring his government upholds its responsibilities under international law rather than trying to smear those who are protesting against the current genocide.
Furthermore, his attempts to use his speech to once again push the arguments for the pernicious anti-boycott bill to become law, reveals his agenda. This bill contains a clause that seeks to uniquely protect Israel above all other states in the world from the peaceful, ethical tactic of divestment and boycott, even whilst it commits genocide. Mr Gove discredits himself, not the Palestinian solidarity movement.
Swinney gets rid of Humza Yousaf's spin doctor, SNP veteran Kevin Pringle
Kevin Pringle, the veteran Scottish National party spin doctor, has been laid off by John Swinney as the new first minister reshapes his team, in a move which has surprised observers at Holyrood.
A former chief spokesman and SNP head of media under Alex Salmond, Pringle was brought back into government by Humza Yousaf when he succeeded Nicola Sturgeon last year; many assumed Yousaf needed his experience and well-oiled relationship with political reporters to help reset his government.
Pringle had previously been at Charlotte Street Partners, a political and public affairs consultancy co-founded by Sturgeon’s former economy advisor Andrew Wilson.
But after Swinney swept into Bute House earlier this month after an uncontested election following Yousaf’s resignation, his name was left off the first list of special advisers published by the Scottish government.
It is unclear why Pringle was not reappointed but the possibility he is seen as too close to Salmond, now a bitter opponent of the SNP, or too willing to brief unofficially, may have been the cause.
Pringle offered a brief statement about his departure.
Working in government is a privilege, and one I greatly enjoyed, during both the last year and the years after the SNP was first elected in 2007.
I wish the Scottish government, and indeed MSPs of all parties, well in making the most of the new opportunities that lie ahead. Regarding my own professional future, I want to take a little time to explore options for fulfilling challenges outside the world of government and politics.
Here is the full text of John Glen’s statement to MPs about compensation for victims of the infected blood scandal.
Here is a paper with further details of the new £210,000 interim payments announced by Glen.
And here is the news release about the appointment of Sir Robert Francis as interim chair of the new Infected Blood Compensation Authority.
John Swinney apologises for infected blood scandal and promises 'culture of openness' in Scottish public services
John Swinney, Scotland’s first minister, has just delivered his own apology, on behalf of the Scottish government, to victims of the infected blood scandal. There are 3,000 families affected in Scotland, he said.
He told MSPs:
Today, in the light of the final report from the Inquiry, on behalf of the Scottish government, and as first minister of Scotland, I apologise unreservedly to everyone who has been affected in any way by these events.
To everyone who has been affected, I want to say that you have been failed by the organisations and processes that should have been in place to protect and support you, and I am sorry for the hurt, worry and damage that you have suffered.
I acknowledge, and welcome, the apology issued by the prime minister yesterday on behalf of the UK government.
This was, rightly, a fulsome apology. But not only that, the prime minister’s statement also contained two solemn promises. First, that comprehensive compensation would be paid to both the infected and affected. And second that a fundamental rebalancing of the system will be required in any consideration of the report’s recommendations.
On the first, the Scottish government will work collaboratively with the UK government to put that into effect. On the second, the Scottish Government will take the necessary steps within our own responsibilities to make that happen.
Swinney said the report highlighted the need for “a culture of openness, a culture of transparency, a culture where patient safety is paramount” in the public sector. He went on:
That is the culture I will insist upon in our public services.
Perhaps the most striking, and indeed disturbing, statement from Sir Brian in the report is that: “This disaster was not an accident. The infections happened because those in authority - doctors, the blood services and successive governments - did not put patient safety first.”
That is something that must never ever happen.
It has taken over 50 years to get to this point. I will do everything in my power to ensure we learn the lessons from this report, from the infected blood scandal, and take all necessary steps so that no one else has to endure the heartbreak and suffering that so many families have faced.
Updated
Labour will set timetable for overseas territories to comply with money laundering rules, David Lammy says
Plans for a new timetable for Britain’s crown dependencies and overseas territories to come in line with UK requirements on money laundering will be set out by the shadow foreign secretary David Lammy later today.
He is picking up on a surprise admission reported in the Guardian by the deputy foreign secretary Andrew Mitchell that nearly 40% of money laundering in the world is being committed by the City of London and the UK overseas territories.
Mitchell also admitted that the overseas territories had failed to meet repeated UK government requests to set up public registers of beneficial share ownership, a means whereby law enforcement agencies and the public can find the ultimate owners of wealth hidden in overseas territories such as the Cayman Islands and the British Virgins Islands.
The foreign secretary, David Cameron, and Mitchell have both campaigned on the issue since 2014, but the Conservative government, following Cameron’s resignation as prime minister in 2016, effectively dropped the issue leaving London, in Lammy words, as a kleptocrat’s monopoly board.
In a speech signalling that he is determined to fill the vacuum left by the Conservatives, Lammy will say that fighting corruption will become one of the core themes of his foreign secretaryship.
He will reiterate his support for an international anti-corruption court, and vow to hold an anti-corruption summit to start to integrate the issues, including incentives for whistleblowers.
Addressing the IPPR, a left-of-centre thinktank, he will say he “passionately believes, specially as a son of the Caribbean, that our overseas territories contribute hugely not only in people to people ties when it comes to our economy and by making critical contributions to our global role in oceanic and environmental protection.”
He will say the OTs have made real progress in cooperation with enforcement, but will add it remains the case that three out of four of the offshore jurisdictions with the highest risk of involvement with international corruption are UK OTs. “This is a contradiction that cuts into our credibility. We must be honest about this and we must solve it,” he will say.
He will promise a time-bound action plan to require the OTs to come into line with international standards on transparency.
The OTs baulked at bringing in public registers of beneficial ownership last year citing an 2022 European Court of Justice ruling that raised human rights concerns about public access to the register. The OTs are not subject to the ECJ, but feel it has implications for them.
But since then the European parliament has passed new laws due to appear in a fifth EU anti-laundering directive setting out precisely who can have access.
Most of the OTs, often accused of playing for time, have promised in talks with foreign office ministers that they will implement a public register by the end of this year or in the case of the British Virgin Islands by the summer of next year. The UK government appeared to have accepted these delays, even though they contain numerous caveats.
Lammy will also point out there have been zero convictions for sanctions evasion since a panoply of laws were introduced in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and he will ask whether the 18-fold increase in car exports to Azerbaijan suggests vehicles are being sold on into Russia. There has been a 500% increase in exports of Russian sanctioned goods since 2022 to Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia and Uzbekistan, he will point out.
Ed Conway, Sky’s economics editor, explored this issue at some length a thread on X earlier this year.
NEW
— Ed Conway (@EdConwaySky) March 18, 2024
Britain's motoring lobby group the @SMMT has insisted that an unprecedented 2,000% increase in car exports to Azerbaijan has NOTHING to with Russia and is explained by the fact that this former Soviet state is a “flourishing market in its own right”.
This is rather... odd
🧵 pic.twitter.com/KFcom4y6pN
The Labour MP Diana Johnson, who as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on haemophilia and contaminated blood has been one of the leading campaigners on behalf of the victims of the infected blood scandal, has posted a message on X saying it is still unclear whether or not the government will accept all the recommendations of Sir Brian Langstaff’s report.
I welcome the compensation statement made today following @bloodinquiry’s final report.
— Diana Johnson DBE MP 🇬🇧🇺🇦🌈 (@DianaJohnsonMP) May 21, 2024
This would not have been possible without the strength and perseverance of those infected and affected who have campaigned for so long for justice.
(🧵1/2) pic.twitter.com/fmAAzpZyBq
(2/2) However, Sir Brian Langstaff produced his final recommendations on compensation in April 2023.
— Diana Johnson DBE MP 🇬🇧🇺🇦🌈 (@DianaJohnsonMP) May 21, 2024
It is still unclear if all these recommendations have been accepted.
More openness and transparency is still urgently needed to build trust and move forward. pic.twitter.com/hBTCyTShwn
In the Commons a few minutes ago John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, said that, given the report runs to seven volumes and more than 2,000 pages, it would take the government some time to come up with a serious response. But he said he expected to be able to give an “outline” of how the government would repond when MPs debate the report after the Whitsun recess. He said he would be opening that debate, and a health minister would be closing it.
Glen refuses to say how much full compensation package might cost, saying it is not possible to know yet
Back in the Commons, John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, tells MPs that he cannot say how much the compensation to victims of the infected blood scheme will cost. He said the government has said it will pay whatever it has to. But he said it was not possible to say what the final figure would be because the tariff levels have not yet been set. (See 12.50pm and 12.53pm.)
There have been reports saying the full compensation bill could top £10bn.
But, as Sky’s Beth Rigby reports, the government has been reluctant to come up with a firm figure, even unofficially.
Whitehall source:
— Beth Rigby (@BethRigby) May 20, 2024
- scheme outline will meet “expectations & recommendations” of report
- won’t focus on total amount of compensation as numbers who claim & variability of entitlement so wide
- will be round of interim payments b4 (autumn) elex & perhaps some final settlements… https://t.co/ta7EMMi9oC
Whitehall source:
- scheme outline will meet “expectations & recommendations” of report
- won’t focus on total amount of compensation as numbers who claim & variability of entitlement so wide
- will be round of interim payments b4 (autumn) elex & perhaps some final settlements but govt have to set up an arms length body
The full text of Mel Stride’s welfare speech this morning is now on the Deparment for Work and Pensions’ website.
Alison McGovern, the acting shadow work and pensions secretary, has issued this response to Mel Stride’s speech this morning. (See 12pm and 1.40pm.)
After laying bare the Tories damning failure on work, skills and training, Mel Stride is going to be furious when he finds out who has been in power for the last 14 years.
Talking shops and billboards do not even scratch the surface of what is needed to get Britain working. The Tories should be prioritising proper plans to tackle worker shortages and adopting Labour’s plan to connect the immigration system to skills.
Updated
Chris Bryant (Lab) said the infected blood scandal did not reflect well on MPs. There was not a single report from a select committee on this issue. Parliament did not do its job properly, he said.
In the Commons the Labour MP Ben Bradshaw said every permanent secretary in Westminster should be asked to say how many public inquiry recommendations affecing their departments have not yet been implemented.
Glen said that was a good proposal.
Back in the Commons, John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, told MPs that by the end of next week he expected the new Infected Blood Compensation Authority to have 20 staff.
Stride brushes off question about carer's allowance crisis, saying people have duty to check they're eligible for benefits
The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, has said he has been moved by Guardian reporting about carers being forced to pay back large amounts of inadvertently overpaid carers’ allowance – but argued that it was up to individuals to keep a track on how much they are allowed to earn.
There have been increasing calls for changes to the system after reporting by Patrick Butler and Josh Halliday uncovered that more than 150,000 unpaid carers have had to pay back sometimes huge sums after the Department for Work and Pensions failed to notify them when they had inadvertently breached earnings rules.
Stride was asked about the issue following a speech at a job centre in Kennington, south London, at which he laid out more efforts to take people off benefits and into work, in part to fill jobs formerly taken by overseas workers.
Asked how the stories about carers’ plight made him feel, Stride said: “As a fellow human being, I feel as strongly as I’m sure you do.”
But on the wider issue, he said:
It is down to the individual to be responsible for ensuring that they qualify for a benefit for which they apply and for keeping the department updated.
On the broader argument of the speech, Stride said the loss of several hundred thousand overseas employees amid a crackdown on work visas was “a transition that is going to have to be traversed” by employers and government.
Stride largely avoided any overt criticism of people for not wanting to work, dodging one media question about whether “mental health culture [is] going too far”.
Instead he talked up the opportunities to invest in new skills, using a very extended metaphor about the Sutton Hoo archaeological dig which at one point sounded slight as if unemployed people are treasures which need to be dug from the earth and brushed off. (See 12pm.)
Updated
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, pressed the government to accept Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendation for a duty of candour to be imposed on civil servants in his response to Glen’s statement. The Tory MP and former Brexit secretary David Davis made the same point in his question, saying that the victims and prisons bill, which is still going through parliament, imposes a limited duty of candour on officials in specific circumstances. He said the government could legislate quickly by expanding that clause.
In response to David, Glen said he did not think it would be right to act that quickly. He said the government wanted to come up with a response to the report as a whole.
Steve Brine (Con), chair of the health committee, asks if the financial loss element of compensation payments will reflect victims’ inability to get life insurance.
Glen says the social impact and autonomy categories capture a range of impacts.
He says he cannot give an answer on the specific life insurance point. But he says the team have tried to come up with the best way of assessing loss.
Asked to explain why £210,000 was chosen as the new figure for interim compensation payments, Glen says he was trying to get the maximum amount he could pay to those alive, without paying the wrong amount. That was the figure he was given, he says.
Chris Stephens, the SNP’s spokesperson on justice, tells MPs that he wants to echo the reaction from the public gallery (see 1pm) to the appointment of Robert Francis as interim chair of the compensation body.
Emilio Casalicchio from Politico says people in the public gallery have been applauding Glen’s statement.
NEW: Rare sight of people clapping in the Commons public galleries as Cabinet Office Minister John Glen announces Robert Francis (who led the probe into Mid Staffs) will oversee infected blood compensation
— Emilio Casalicchio (@e_casalicchio) May 21, 2024
NEW: Rare sight of people clapping in the Commons public galleries as Cabinet Office Minister John Glen announces Robert Francis (who led the probe into Mid Staffs) will oversee infected blood compensation
Glen says victims to get further interim payments of £210,000 within 90 days
Glen also said the government would be making further interim payments.
Victims have already received interim payments of £100,000.
Glen said, in addition to that, further interim payments of £210,000 would be made.
UPDATE: Glen said:
Today I’m announcing the government will be making further interim payments ahead of the establishment of the full scheme.
Payments of £210,000 will be made to living infected beneficiaries, those registered with existing infected blood support schemes, as well as those who register with the support scheme before the final scheme becomes operational, and the estates of those who pass away between now and payments being made.
I know that time is of the essence, which is why I’m also pleased to say that they will be delivered within 90 days, starting in the summer, so that they can reach those who need it so urgently most.
Updated
Glen says victims should start getting final compensation payments before end of year
Glen said people would be able to appeal if they feel compensation payments are too low.
We’ll also ensure that all claimants are able to appeal their award, both through an internal review process in the Infected Blood Compensation Authority and, where needed, the right to appeal to a first-tier tribunal.
Our expectation is that final payments will start before the end of the year.
Updated
Glen said the compensation scheme would be tariff based.
He said the infected blood community would be consulted before the precise terms of the scheme are set in regulations.
He said the scheme would be flexible. People will be able to take a lump sum, or regular payments, he said.
And he said payments would be exempt from income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. And they would be disregarded for people being assessed for means-tested benefits, he said.
Glen says:
In his report, Sir Brian recommended compensation be awarded with respect to the following five categories.
An injury impact award acknowledging the physical and mental injury caused by the infection; a social impact award to address the stigma or social isolation as a result of the infection; an autonomy award, acknowledging how family and private life was disrupted during this time; a care award to compensate for past and future care needs of anyone infected; and, finally, a financial loss award for past and future financial losses suffered as a result of the infection.
The government accepts this recommendation, with two small refinements informed by the work of the expert group and designed for simplicity and speed – two other principles that Sir Brian asserted.
First, the care award will be directly awarded to the person with the infection or their estate, and, second, the financial loss award will be paid either directly to the person with the infection or where an infected person has tragically died before the establishment of the scheme, their estate and affected persons who are dependent on them.
Now, sadly, many people have links to multiple individuals who are infected, or are both infected themselves and affected by another’s infection, so multiple injury awards will be offered to reflect the scale of the loss and suffering.
Updated
Glen says Infected Blood Compensation Authority being set up, with Robert Francis as interim chair
John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, starts by reiterating the apology delivered by Rishi Sunak yesterday to victims of the infected blood scandal.
And he thanks Sir Brian Langstaff for his work.
He says meeting people from the infected blood community as he finalised details of the compensation was the greatest privilege of his ministerial career.
He says there will be a further chance for MPs to debate the report after the Whitsun recess.
And the government will respond to the recommendations as soon as it can.
The government will pay comprehensive compensation to those infected and affected, he says.
He says an Infected Blood Compensation Authority is being set up. Sir Robert Francis will be the interim chair of the organisation. (Francis produced the interim report on how a scheme should operate.)
Glen says people who have been infected with infected blood products will be eligible to claim compensation. And if an eligible person has died, compensation will be paid to their estate.
And he says that, when a person with an eligible infection is accepted, their loved ones will be able to apply for compensation in their own right.
People already registered with the scheme already established will automatically be considered for compensation, Glen says.
UPDATE: Glen said:
When a person with an eligible infection has been accepted onto the scheme, their affected loved ones will be able to apply for compensation in their own right.
That means partners, parents, siblings, children, friends and family who have acted as carers of those who are infected are all eligible to claim.
Now, I’m aware that being asked to provide evidence of eligibility will likely be distressing, so I’m determined to minimise that as much as possible and I’m pleased to confirm today that anyone already registered with one of the existing infected blood support schemes will automatically be considered eligible for compensation.
Updated
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, starts by saying that more time than usual has been set aside for this statement.
That means it could last well beyond an hour.
Cabinet Office minister John Glen to make statement to MPs on compensation for infected blood scandal victims
John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, is about to deliver a statement to MPs on compensation to victims of the infected blood scandal.
Rayner says Labour will aim for its new town developments to have 40% social or affordable homes
Angela Rayner, the deputy Labour leader and shadow levelling up secretary, gave details this morning of the “new towns code” that Labour will apply to decide where new towns can be built.
Labour would not just be demanding “more units, at any cost,” she said.
She went on:
The reason many local communities resist new homes is often because the housing is of the wrong type, in the wrong place - it doesn’t come with the schools, GP surgeries and green spaces that make communities, not just streets.
Or the affordable and social housing local people need.
Our next generation of new towns will build homes fit for the future. Creating places where people want to live. Inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds, and the Garden City project.
We will set out a new towns code - criteria that developers must meet in these new settlements:
-More social and affordable homes - with a gold standard aim of 40 per cent
-Buildings with character, in tree-lined streets that fit in with nearby areas
-Design that pays attention to local history and identity
-Planning fit for the future, with good links to town and city centres
-Guaranteed public transport and public services, from doctors’ surgeries to schools
-And access to nature, parks, and places for children to play.
New towns are just one way we get good quality, affordable houses built in the national interest.
Our local housing recovery plan will reverse the Conservatives’ damaging changes to planning, getting stalled sites moving at speed.
Peter Walker has more from the speech here.
Home Office publishes Walney review on political violence, with Sunak promising to study recommendations in detail
Rishi Sunak said this morning that the government would be carefully studying the proposals in the report from John Woodcock (Lord Walney) on political violence. Speaking in Austria, Sunak said:
Extremism has no place in our society. Threatening or intimidating behaviour that disrupts the lives of ordinary hardworking people isn’t acceptable.
I have been very clear about that, I want to make sure the police have our full backing and the powers they need to clamp down on it.
That is why we have given them those new powers, making sure that we can ban the use of face coverings, flares, pyrotechnics, climbing on war memorials …
Of course, we will study Lord Walney’s recommendations in detail, but I am very clear it is not the British way to behave in an intimidating or threatening manner and we will make sure the police have our full support and backing in clamping down on that type of behaviour.
The Home Office has just published the Walney review, entitled Protecting our Democracy from Coercion. Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, was more complimentary about it this morning (see 10.58am), but ministers have not given a firm commitment to supporting its recommendations.
Woodcock was commissioned to write the report more than three years ago and he has been briefing reporters on some of his proposals for some months now.
Here is the press summary of the judgment in the case against the Home Office on protest law won by Liberty this morning. (See 11.18am.) And here is the full judgment.
Here is the full text of Michael Gove’s speech this morning on antisemitism.
Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, has said that welfare reform can help “uncover the treasure that is the hidden talent in our country”.
In a speech this morning on reforming the benefits system, Stride said:
I want to use the power of welfare reform to uncover the treasure that is the hidden talent in our country, to unleash the potential in communities that have too often been overlooked.
Of course, our tools in this endeavour are wide-ranging, reflecting the different approaches that we are taking, from the fine chisel and soft brush for tailored and targeted support to boost skills and help recruit people into high demand sectors; to the large-scale excavator helping to deliver our structural reform, ensuring welfare supports and reflects the changing modern world.
As PA Media reports, in an extended metaphor comparing the benefits system to archaeological discovery, Stride said he wanted to ensure “everyone who is able to work has the best possible chance of staying or returning to employment”.
Stride is also launching a major advertising campaign intended to get firms with staffing shortages to make better use of jobcentres.
Updated
IMF tells UK not to cut taxes as it warns over £30bn fiscal hole
The International Monetary Fund has signalled its opposition to pre-election tax cuts from Jeremy Hunt as it warned the government of a looming £30bn hole in the UK’s public finances, Larry Elliott reports.
Graeme Wearden has more on what the IMF has been saying on his business live blog.
Sunak says ICC's request for arrest warrant for Israeli PM 'deeply unhelpful development'
Rishi Sunak has described the international criminal court’s request for an arrest warrant to be issued against the Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu as “a deeply unhelpful development”.
Speaking in Vienna, Sunak went on:
Of course it is still subject to a final decision, but it remains deeply unhelpful nonetheless.
There is no moral equivalence between a democratic state exercising its lawful right to self-defence and the terrorist group Hamas …
It is wrong to conflate and equivocate between those two different entities.
What I am very clear is that this will make absolutely no difference in getting a pause in the fighting, getting aid into the region, or indeed the hostages out.
The US president Joe Biden described the ICC’s move as “outrageous”.
Court says Home Office acted unlawfully when it tightened anti-protest law without fair consultation
Regulations which lowered the threshold for police intervening in protests were unlawful, the high court has ruled. PA Media reports.
Civil liberties group Liberty brought legal action against the Home Office over protest regulations passed by statutory instrument last year.
The government measures lowered the threshold for what is considered “serious disruption” to community life, from “significant” and “prolonged” to “more than minor”.
They also allowed police officers to take into account “any relevant cumulative disruption” of repeated protests.
The regulations came after the government tried to introduce the same changes when the public order bill went through parliament, but they were rejected by the Lords at the time by 254 votes to 240.
The step to restore the provisions by statutory instrument, which faces less scrutiny than primary legislation, was criticised at the time but passed last year.
At a hearing in February, lawyers for Liberty asked the High Court to quash the “unlawful” provision.
And in a ruling this morning, two judges ruled for the group, finding the Home Office acted outside of its powers by reducing the threshold and failed to carry out a fair consultation process.
Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said: “As a matter of ordinary and natural language ‘more than minor’ is not within the scope of the word ‘serious’.”
After the ruling Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said:
This ruling is a huge victory for democracy and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants.
We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in and it’s vital that the government respects that.
These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too.
This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.
Updated
Q: Will the government delay brining in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act if it becomes clear it could allow more antisemitic speech at universities? It could be used to defend someone giving a speech on Holocaust denial.
Gove says the government wants universities to be spaces where free speech is uphold, but where people are not intimidated.
Gove says government should consider making organisers of repeat pro-Palestinian marches pay policing costs
Q: What do you want protest organisers to do to stop antisemitism on pro-Palestinian marches?
Gove says they should be clear what is not acceptable, including slogans and symbols.
But there are things government can do too, he says. The Woodcock report addresses this, he says. He says the police could take into account the cumulative impact of marches on certain communities.
And he says it is “certainly worth considering” whether organisers of these marches should be liable for the policing costs if they insist on holding events “again and again and again”.
Gove is now taking questions.
Asked if the UK would enforce an arrest warrant issued by the international criminal court against Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli PM, Gove says he is not a laywer, but he says it was wrong for the ICC to imply equivalence between Israel and Hamas.
Gove says he wants to appoint independent adviser to deal with anti-Muslim hatred, to match antisemitism adviser
Gove says the report being published by John Woodcock today on political violence is “brilliant” in its analysis.
And he says its recommendatons are compelling and far-reaching. He goes on:
Some will require detailed debate and thought, but that cannot be an excuse for delay in dealing with the challenges that he addresses. We must make rapid progress to deal with the intimidatory consequences of marches.
He says the government needs to bolster the role of the independent adviser on antisemitism. And he says he will establish a parallel adviser on anti-Muslim hatred.
Gove claims that the anti-Israel protests that have sprung up on university campuses around the world have not appeared in a vacuum, and are the product of “years of ideological radicalisation”.
He says the decolonisation narrative is attractive to authoritarian states, because the iddea that “the success of liberal Western nations is built on plunder” undermines their legitimacy.
And he says delegitimising Israel is important to the left “because Israel is transparently successful because of its democratic values, not exploitation”.
Gove claims BDS campaign against Israel antisemitic
In his speech Michael Gove is now addressing what he calls “the BDS campaign” – the boycott, divestment, sanctions campaign aimed at Israel. He says he sees it as “explicitly antisemitic”. He says the ideologue behind it does not accept the right for Israel to exist.
Gove says it is legitimate, and sometimes necessary, to criticise the actions of the state of Israel.
But he says Israel is being singled out in a way that does not happen to other countries.
There are no BDS campaigns directed against Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime guilty of killing more Muslims in living memory than any other.
There are no student encampments, urging university administrators to cut all ties with China given what is happening in Xinjiang or Hong Kong, or what happened in Tibet.
I know of no efforts to organise marches in their thousands to demand immediate action to stop the persecution of the Rohingya or Korean people by Myanmar’s government.
I may have missed it, but agitation to end the war in Sudan or in the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Mali, or Ethiopia, does not seem to energise our campuses.
And nor is there any suggestion, other than with Israel, that the errors or even crimes of a country’s leaders should necessitate the end of that country’s independent existence.
Updated
Factor 8, one of the organisations campaigning on behalf of people affected by the infected blood scandal, has said Ken Clarke should have his peerage removed.
Strip Lord Ken Clarke of his peerage now.
— Factor 8 (@Factor8Campaign) May 21, 2024
Infected Blood Inquiry findings are clear. He Lied, We Died.
People like Ken Clarke do not belong in @UKHouseofLords pic.twitter.com/qzRoRAI2IZ
— Factor 8 (@Factor8Campaign) May 21, 2024
Gove accuses organisers of pro-Palestinian marches of not doing enough to stop protesters 'promoting hate'
Michael Gove starts his speech by describing the 7 October Hamas attack as the largest pogrom against the Jewish people since the Holocaust.
But, soon after the attack, a remarkable thing happened. People started questioning whether the attack had happened, he says.
He quotes a Jewish peer saying in the weeks after the attack that he was more worried about the safety of his daughter in London than he was about the safety of his son, who was serving with the Israel Defence Forces.
Every day there are incidents of Jews experience antisemitism in the UK, he says. And pro-Palestinian marches are taking place regularly where compassionate peope, “driven by a desire for peace and an end to suffering”, are marching side by side with people “promoting hate”. He goes on:
And we know now that it is genuinely dangerous for people to be openly, clearly proudly Jewish near these marches. At a time when we’re all encouraged to be our whole, authentic selves, to celebrate our identity, to be out and proud, there is only one group told that they and they alone can only be tolerated on terms set by others.
UPDATE: Gove said:
And inseparable from these incidents are the increasingly strident, visible and lurid, demonstrations of antisemitism on our streets during protest marches. Swastikas, Hamas banners, depictions of Jews as exploiters, devils, child killers pigs. It’s incessant. We saw it again only this weekend. The imagery of Der Sturmer paraded past the gates of Downing Street.
Now, of course, I know that many of those on these marches are compassionate people - driven by a desire for peace and an end to suffering. But they are side by side with those who are promoting hate.
The organisers of these marches could do everything in their power to stop that. Many – the majority – don’t.
And we now know that it is - genuinely - dangerous for people to be openly, clearly, proudly, Jewish near these marches. At a time when we are all encouraged to be our whole authentic selves, to celebrate our identity, to be out and proud - there is only one group told they - and they alone - can only be tolerated on terms set by others - Jews.
The organisers of the marches say that there are Jewish people on their demonstrations.
But they are only safe if they deny what is dear to so many Jewish people - the safety of people in Israel. If they are to be accepted on these marches then they must knuckle under, accept the calls to globalise the intifada or end the Zionist entity.
Updated
Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, is about to give his speech on antisemitism.
There is a live feed here.
And here is Pippa Crerar’s preview story.
Minister says Ken Clarke has questions to answer, as infected blood campaigners say he should lose peerage over scandal
A cabinet minister has said Ken Clarke has questions to answer after campaigners said he should lose his peerage over his role in the infected blood scandal.
Clarke, who was a health minister and health secretary in the 1980s, was one of the former ministers criticised most explicitly in yesterday’s report. Although Sir Brian Langstaff made it clear that the scandal went on for decades, and involved politicians and officials from multiple administrations, Clarke is a particular bête noir for campaigners because of the unsympathetic tone he struck when he gave evidence.
Des Collins, a solicitor representing victims of the scandal, told the Daily Telegraph: “The chair to the inquiry thinks [Clarke] was wrong back in the day and I think yes, he should have his peerage stripped. Take no prisoners. There are a lot who haven’t been singled out but he was one of them.”
This morning Clive Smith, chairman of the Haemophilia Society, told LBC that Clarke gave evidence to the inquiry that was “breathtaking in the extreme”.
Asked if Clarke should lose his peerage, Smith said:
We wrote to the upper house when it was suggested that he was going to get a peerage, saying ‘Please don’t do that yet, wait until the infected blood inquiry has reported’.
Now we have the conclusions of the infected blood inquiry report, I think our letter was well-timed and entirely accurate. The way in which he gave his evidence (to the inquiry) was appalling.
Yesterday Smith said Clarke should apologise to victims, not just for what he did as a minister, but for the manner in which he gave evidence to the inquiry.
Removing a peerage from someone is an extreme measure. It requires an act of parliament, and it has not happened since the first world war, when some peers lost their titles because they had supported Germany.
In an interview with Sky News this morning, Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, ducked a question about Clarke’s peerage, saying that was a matter for the honours forfeiture committee.
But Stride did not fully support his Tory colleague, and he said Clarke had questions to answer. He said:
Sir Brian has come forward with some very strong observations of Ken, in the context of the scandal. Clearly there are questions that I’ve no doubt Ken will be addressing in time.
As PA Media reports, in 1983, an Aids leaflet was published alongside a press release in which Lord Clarke said: “It has been suggested that Aids may be transmitted in blood or blood products. There is no conclusive proof that this is so.” That line was repeated over several years.
Langstaff said in his report on Monday:
This line to take, whilst technically correct, was indefensible. It did not spell out the real risk. It gave false reassurance.
It lacked candour and, by not telling the whole truth, was misleading.
It was not an accurate reflection of the (Department of Health’s) actual understanding, which was that it was likely that Aids was transmitted through blood and blood products.
No minister challenged the ‘no conclusive proof’ line. They should have done.
Updated
Max Hill, a former director of public prosecutions, said this morning that, although the corporate manslaughter charge could not be used to prosecute people involved in the infected blood scandal, other options were available.
He told Times Radio:
If the evidence is there, there is no bar to an investigation and a prosecution.
Now, sadly, corporate manslaughter came into force as a criminal offence on April 6, 2008 – much too late to deal with this case.
However, there are other criminal offences which pre-date corporate manslaughter, where individuals have a duty of care and [if] they breached that duty in a gross way – that’s a legal term – they can be held liable.
Gross negligence manslaughter comes to my mind and also misconduct in public office.
It’s not for me to know whether either of those are feasible in these circumstances, but the criminal law does provide answers such as this even decades after the event.
Austrian chancellor says Rwanda-style policies needed to deal with EU's illegal migration problem after meeting with Sunak
The Austrian chancellor, Karl Nehammer, has described Rwanda-style deportation policies as “part of the solution” to the problem posed by illegal migration.
Nehammer backed Rishi Sunak’s flagship policy after the two leaders met in Vienna this morning for talks. In comments to the press afterwards, Nehammer said that he supported “the British path and the British model” for dealing with illegal migration and he welcome the fact that 15 EU countries have now spoken out in favour of gettting safe third countries to process asylum seekers.
In a message posted on X, Nehammer also thanked Sunak for his “strong support” on this issue.
Prime Minister @RishiSunak and I agree: asylum procedures should be carried out in safe third countries. This approach requires robust protection of Europe‘s external borders alongside the establishement of well-functioning asylum centers in these third countries. Thank you for… pic.twitter.com/9RBLnrT6Lv
— Karl Nehammer (@karlnehammer) May 21, 2024
Prime Minister @RishiSunak and I agree: asylum procedures should be carried out in safe third countries. This approach requires robust protection of Europe‘s external borders alongside the establishement of well-functioning asylum centers in these third countries. Thank you for your strong support.
In their joint appearance before the media, Sunak said that illegal migration has become “truly one of the defining issues of our time” and that “we face criminal gangs that are growing in strength across the European continent and beyond”.
He said Nehammer had been “right on this issue for a long time” and has been bringing attention to it in Europe. He added:
It’s increasingly clear that many other countries now agree that that is the approach that is required – bold, novel, looking at safe country partnerships.
Updated
Minister claims it's 'not inconceivable' that officials or politicians could face prosecution over infected blood scandal
Good morning. Today there will be further reaction to the vast and damning report from Sir Brian Langstaff’s infected blood inquiry. Rishi Sunak told MPs yesterday that the government would pay “comprehensive compensation to those infected and those affected by this scandal” and John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, will make a statement to the Commons on this after 12.30pm. But there is also increasing interest in whether any of those responsible may face prosecution.
Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, was doing a media round this morning and he described prosecutions as “not inconceivable”. Asked if officials or politicians could be taken to court over what happened, Stride replied:
I think all of those things should and will be looked at ... I have no doubt that all of those things will be extremely carefully looked at, because in that 2,700-page report, there are many questions and many short failings that have surfaced, and they all need to be looked at very carefully. And it is not inconceivable that what you’ve described may be something that transpires.
Stride is one of several politicians giving speeches on what is set to be a busy day for political news. Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Rishi Sunak is meeting Karl Nehammer, the Austrian chancellor, in Vienna.
10am: Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, gives a speech on antisemitism.
10.45am: Angela Rayner, the deputy Labour leader and shadow levelling up secretary, gives a speech on Labour’s plans for new towns.
11am: Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, gives a speech on welfare reform.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
Lunchtime: The government is due to publish a long-awaited report from John Woodcock (Lord Walney) on political violence and disruption.
After 12.30pm: John Glen, the Cabinet Office minister, gives a statement to MPs on compensation for victims of the infected blood scandal.
2.30pm: Andrew Mitchell, the deputy foreign secretary, and Alan Mak, a trade minister, give evidence to the Commons business committee on arms exports to Israel.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on X (Twitter). I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use X; I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And 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 BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
