Afternoon summary
Rishi Sunak has announced a plan to grant an unprecedented blanket acquittal for hundreds of post office operators wrongly convicted in the Horizon IT scandal. Responding to an urgent question about this after PMQs, Kevin Hollinrake, the postal services minster, said the inquiry into the scandal had shown that the Post Office acted not just with incompetence, but with “malevolence” too. (See 12.49pm.)
Lawyers have warned against setting a precedent of government interference in the justice system after the plans for blanket laws to exonerate the post office operators were announced. As PA Media reports, while many welcomed proposals for legislation which could clear the names of hundreds of post office branch managers in England and Wales by the end of the year, some barristers and solicitors cautioned the government against setting a “legal and constitutional precedent”. Sam Townend KC, chairman of the Bar Council, said:
We will examine the proposals carefully. Anxious care should be taken as to ensuring the independence of the judiciary and the government must be careful about setting legal and constitutional precedent.
There are many lessons to be learned from the Post Office scandal. Not only is there a clear case for parliament to review the ability of certain corporate bodies to bring private prosecutions but it also highlights the vital importance of access to legal advice and the urgent need to repair confidence in the justice system.
Updated
Public approve of government's handling of Israel-Hamas war more than Labour's, poll suggests
One of the reasons why many Tories fear they have no chance of winning the next election is because the Labour party is ahead on all the issues that count. Here is a chart from a UK in a Changing Europe report on public opinion published last month that shows Labour leading on the economy, law and order, the NHS, education, housing and immigration. On other mainstream issues, Labour would be ahead too.
But today it has emerged that the Conservatives have a lead on at least one issue, and it is a surprising one. YouGov polling commissioned by Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) and the Council for Arab-British Understanding (Caabu) shows that people think the government’s handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been better than Labour’s.
Asked about the government’s handling of the conflict, 17% of respondents said they approved and 29% said they disapproved – a net score of –12.
But, asked about Labour’s handling of the conflict, only 9% said they approved and 30% said they disapproved – a net score of -21.
This is surprising in some respects because, in terms of what they have said about the conflict, it is very hard to differentiate between the UK government’s position and the shadow cabinet’s. The poll, which also found 71% of people in favour of an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and only 12% opposed, seems to have been commissioned with the intention of showing that both main parties are out of touch with public opinion. The Tories and Labour have both avoided calling for an immediate ceasefire, advocating humanitarian pauses instead.
As for why the figures for the two parties are so different, there are probably three main explanations.
First, the figures reflect the fact that Tory-leaning voters are more likely to say they back the government’s approach (30%) but not to say they back Labour’s approach (8%). Labour-leaning voters, on this issue at least, are a bit less tribal. Some 47% of them disapprove of the government’s approach, but 35% of them disapprove of Labour’s too.
Second, Keir Starmer has faced at least eight frontbench resignations over his Gaza policy, and dozens more at councillor level. For many respondents, that must compound the perception that his response has been problematic.
And, third, YouGov asked about the government’s handling of the conflict, not the Conservative party’s. The results might have been different if the Tories had been mentioned in the question because their reputation is so toxic.
Chris Doyle, the director of Caabu, said the findings should be a wake-up call. He said:
This poll shows a total and utter lack of public confidence in the way both the UK government and the Labour party have handled this. The figures could hardly be lower. This should be a wake-up call to the political leaderships to realign themselves both with public sentiment, international law and the need to address the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza.
Updated
In its splash on the Post Office Horizon scandal this morning the Daily Telegraph said that at least 27 of the prosecutions were brought by the Crown Prosecution Service, not the Post Office, “raising serious questions about whether Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, oversaw a number of wrongful convictions during his five-year tenure as director of public prosecutions between 2008 and 2013”.
At Labour’s post-PMQs briefing, a spokesperson for Keir Starmer said Starmer was not aware of these cases when he was DPP. They did not cross his desk, the spokesperson said.
Updated
Kevin Hollinrake, the minister for postal services, has now finished responding to the UQ on the Post Office Horizon scandal. It went on for more than an hour and a half.
Here is our story about the announcement.
Keir Starmer would also back Alan Bates getting a knighthood. (See 2.03pm.) At a post-PMQs briefing, Starmer’s spokesperson was asked about this campaign and said:
Alan Bates clearly has emerged as a hero throughout this for the way in which he has led the campaign, the fortitude and resolve he was shown given everything that has been thrown at him throughout this process.
Obviously honours have their own independent process, but I’m sure that is something the public would regard as entirely appropriate and we would support.
No 10 backs call for Post Office justice campaigner Alan Bates to receive knighthood
Esther McVey, who has embraced the title of “minister for common sense” in her role as Cabinet Office minister without portfolio, has told GB News that she hopes Alan Bates, the post office operator who led the campaign to get justice for colleagues wrongly convicted, gets a knighthood. She said:
I’m quite convinced this man is an extraordinary person and the public will be behind him. Anybody can nominate him and I’m quite sure we will see Sir Alan as soon as possible.
As Harry Cole from the Sun reports, at the post-PMQs lobby briefing, the PM’s secretary more or less confirmed the knighthood was in the post.
NEW: No10 back knighthood for Alan Bates after Minister for Common Sense Esther McVey says it should be done “as soon as possible.”
— Harry Cole (@MrHarryCole) January 10, 2024
PM’s Press Secretary says “that sounds like common sense to me.”
It is certainly a popular cause. This is from John Stevens, Cole’s opposite number at the Daily Mirror, highlighting a petition on 38 Degrees for Bates to receive a CBE or a knighthood.
Give Alan Bates an honour for exposing Post Office scandal
— John Stevens (@johnestevens) January 10, 2024
Sign our petition now ✍️https://t.co/DdYz5C0uKk
But there is also something a bit depressing about the way the honours system means that almost every story about public success or failure in Britain ends up being refracted into a question about who gets, or loses, a gong. Does this happen in other countries?
Updated
Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells refused to hold meeting with minister without her lawyer being present, MPs told
George Freeman (Con) says that he was never minster for postal services, but that he was asked to cover that portfolio at some point. When he needed to deal with this issue, instead of just accepting the line he was given, he asked for a proper briefing. But he was told Paula Vennells, the Post Office boss, said she would refuse to meet him unless accompanied by her lawyer.
UPDATE: Freeman said:
I was never minister for the Post Office, but I remember as a minister in the department being asked to cover for an absent minister, and when refusing to just read out the speech but ask for a proper day of briefings from officials, and asked to meet Paula Vennells, I was told she would refuse to meet me without her lawyer …
I want to highlight that this saga raises some very important issues about scrutiny, accountability, responsibility in our public office and in public administration, difficult questions that this house must tackle.
Updated
Karl Turner (Lab) asks if the government will ensure that the Post Office is never allowed to prosecute anyone ever again.
Hollinrake says the government has been looking at this issue. The justice secretary, Alex Chalk, has concerns about this, he says. He says he expects Chalk to make a statement to MPs at some point.
Back in the Commons Maria Miller (Con) says this case highlights the need to ban the use of non-disclosure agreements in cases like this, because the Post Office used them to silence critics of what it was doing. Does Hollinrake agree they should not be used in cases like this?
Hollinrake says he will be happy to speak to Miller about her concerns. But he says non-disclosure agreements cannot stop people going to the police when they suspect wrongdoing.
Updated
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson was unable to say how many sub-post office operators would be affected by the legislation, or how much compensation would be paid.
And he said the government would be working with administrations in Scotland and Northern Ireland, where justice is devolved, to ensure Post Office workers in those countries subject to unsafe convictions are also cleared.
Hollinrake says bill to quash Post Office convictions would have happened anyway, but ITV drama did 'push things forward'
Hollinrake tells MPs he thinks the government would have ended up announcing legislation of this kind anyway, even without the ITV drama, but he says the programme (Mr Bates vs The Post Office) did speed up the process.
UPDATE: Hollinrake said:
Last November we introduced the fixed sum award. That’s way before the TV series of course … And we started to look at different ways to overturn convictions way before the TV series was aired.
So it’s not the case that this TV series – excellent though it was – has … resulted in these different changes. It’s fair to say I think the whole House and the whole country was shocked by what it’s seen on the television, so it has made it easier to push certain things forward more quickly.
But I think we would have arrived at this position anyway. But I’m glad we’re here today moving forward at the pace we’re moving it forward now.
Updated
Sir Bob Neill (Con), the chair of the Commons justice committee, says this move is unprecedented. He suggests he has concerns about overturning decisions of the judiciary like this and he asks if the government will publish a draft brill for swift scrutiny (by his committee, presumably) and if he will ensure that, because of its constitutional implications, it goes to a committee of the whole house (meaning all MPs can take part in the committee stage debates and votes, not just members of the bill committee).
Hollinrake says he will discuss these points with Neill.
Updated
This is what the PM’s spokesperson told journalist at the post-PMQs lobby briefing about the Post Office Horizon legislation.
We will introduce new primary legislation to quash all convictions that were based on erroneous Horizon evidence or the egregious behaviour of the Post Office in the period in question.
This will be done on a blanket basis, clearing people’s names and making sure they access the compensation they rightly deserve as quickly as possible instead of waiting for years for the courts to wade through hundreds of convictions.
We will in the coming days consider whether to include the small number of cases that already have been considered by the appeal courts.
We will also make sure that postmasters who played a crucial role in first exposing the scandal receive the compensation they deserve.
These individuals, known as the Group Litigation Order (GLO) cohort, who did not receive a criminal conviction but paid out considerable sums of money because of Horizon failures, will receive an upfront offer now of at least £75,000 of compensation.
Kevan Jones (Lab) says Kevin Hollinrake was not allowed to make a statement because Rishi Sunak wanted to announce the news himself.
When a minister is down to make a statement, the PM is normally expected not to give any details of it in advance at PMQs. In practice, if Sunak had confirmed that the government was going to legislate, but asked MPs to wait for half an hour before the minister set out the details, no one would have minded very much. But the announcement in parliament late morning that a ministerial announcement had been scheduled would have been seen by journalists as confirmation that legislation was coming. In the event, Sunak got to break the news himself.
Updated
Duncan Baker (Con) asks how much money the Post Office “stole” from people in this scandal.
Hollinrake says Baker is probably the only former postmaster in the Commons.
He does not have a number, but he will try to get one, he says.
He says, before Horizon was introduced, there were around five convictions of sub-post office operators a year. That went up to 60 a year after Horizon was introduced, he says.
Updated
Marion Fellows for the SNP says payments to victims should not be referred to as compensation. It is financial redress, she says.
In response to the questions from Labour’s Jonathan Reynolds, the shadow business secrary, Hollinrake says it may take some weeks to come up with the legislation.
And he says the scheme will cover victims who were penalised because of problems with the pilot version of Horizon.
David Davis (Con), who tabled the UQ, says some victims of the scandal are not happy about the idea of a mass exoneration because they feel that leaves them lumped in with the handful of people who might have been guilty.
And he asks if the government will recover compensation from Fujitsu, the company behind the flawed Horizon IT.
Hollinrake says it would not have been possible to do individual exonerations without “an exhaustive and time-consuming administrative process”.
And he says the government will consider recovering money from Fujitsu once the inquiry is over, and it has established who was responsible for what went wrong.
Updated
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, says he allowed Hollinrake to speak for longer than is normal when replying to UQ. He says he understands that Hollinrake wanted to make a Commons statement, but was overruled. He says that is why he granted the UQ.
This is curious. It implies Sunak wanted to make an announcement at PMQs, but did not want to have a minister taking questions about the detail.
Updated
What Hollinrake told MPs about how legislation to quash unsafe Post Office convictions will work
Hollinrake is now talking about the legislation to exonerate the hundreds of post office operators whose convictions are unsafe.
He says the law will overturn the convictions of all those convicted in England and Wales on the basis of Post Office evidence.
He accepts there is a risk of people rightly being convicted being let off. But the only alternative would be to consider every case, and that is impractical, he says.
He says people who accept the exoneration will have to sign a statement saying they are innocent. He says that if it turns out subsequently they were not telling the truth, they will be at risk of prosecution for fraud.
UPDATE: Hollinrake said:
We are being faced with a dilemma: either accept the present problem of many people carrying the unjustified slur of conviction, or accept that an unknown number of people who have genuinely stolen from their Post Office will be exonerated and perhaps even compensated.
I can therefore announce that we intend to bring forward legislation as soon as we can to overturn the convictions of all those convicted in England or Wales on the basis of Post Office evidence given during the Horizon scandal.
The government will, in the coming days, consider whether to include the small number of cases that have already been considered by the appeal courts and the convictions upheld.
We recognise this is an exceptional step, but these are exceptional circumstances …
As far as possible we want to avoid guilty people walking away with hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money, but we cannot make the provision of compensation subject to a detailed examination of guilt.
All we ask is that as part of their claims of compensation postmasters sign a statement to the effect they did not commit the crimes of which they are accused. Anyone subsequently found to have signed such a statement untruthfully will be putting themselves at risk of prosecution of fraud.
I do not pretend to the house that this is a foolproof device, but it is a proportionate one which respects the ordeal which these people have already suffered.
It means that an honest postmaster will have his or her conviction overturned and just by signing one document can secure compensation.
Updated
Hollinrake says Post Office Horizon inquiry has shown evidence of 'not only incompetence, but malevolence'
Kevin Hollinrake, the minister for postal services, is now responding to the UQ about the Post Office Horizon scandal.
He refers to the announcement made by the PM earlier.
And he says 30 people who suffered wrongful convictions have now accepted the £600,000 upfront offer as an alternative to going through the detailed compensation assessment scheme. Previously only five people had accepted this.
He says, under the plan announced by the PM, people will be able to apply for a £75,000 upfront payment. But they will still be able to go through the detailed compensation scheme if they want.
He says the evidence from the inquiry has shown evidence of “not only incompetence, but malevolence in many of their actions” by the Post Office. This evidence was not available at the time of the prosecutions, he says.
UPDATE: Hollinrake said:
Hundreds of convictions remain extant. Some of those convictions will have relied on evidence from the discredited Horizon system; others will have been the result of appalling failures of the Post Office’s investigation and prosecution functions. The evidence already emerging from Sir Wyn Williams’s inquiry has shown not only incompetence, but malevolence in many of their actions. This evidence was not available to the courts when they made their decisions on individual cases. So far, 95 out of more than 900 convictions have been overturned. We know that postmasters have been reluctant to apply to have their convictions overturned-many of them have decided that they have been through enough and cannot face further engagement with authority. Many fear having their hopes raised, only for them to be dashed yet again.
Updated
Rosena Allin-Khan (Lab) says some children in Gaza are having to have limbs amputated without pain relief. She asks for more aid for Gaza and for Israel to stop attacking health facilities.
Sunak says that he wants more aid going into Gaza, and that he has raised the plight of civilians with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli PM.
Updated
Katherine Fletcher (Con) asks about trains in her constituency, and a local station. Sunak says Fletcher is a fantastic advocate for her constituents, and that this sounds like a good idea.
Updated
Marian Fellows (SNP) asks what may be the final question of PMQs. She asks if the government will back a social tariff for energy bills.
Sunak says he will ensure Fellows gets a meeting to discuss this. The government is working to ensure vulnerable people this winter get support, he says.
Updated
PMQs - snap verdict
It’s always good to admit your mistakes, so here goes. This morning I said Rishi Sunak would want to announce Post Office Horizon legislation because a big story like this can be “a very useful defence mechanism at PMQs”. (See 9.28am.) He did give us the story, but, as a defence mechanism, it turned out to be hopeless. Keir Starmer left Sunak bouncing off the ropes after one of his most comprehensive PMQs goings-over probably ever.
Arguments work well at PMQs, but nothing is more deadly than ridicule. Gordon Brown’s reputation was never quite the same after Vince Cable described him as going “from Stalin to Mr Bean” and at times Starmer’s withering descriptions of the PM were laugh-out-loud funny. At one point Labour was wary of attacking Sunak over immigration, traditionally a Tory issue, but increasingly Labour is taking the view that the Rwanda scheme is a policy albatross. It was telling that Sunak could not convincingly deny originally having doubts about the idea. Starmer has repeatedly denounced Sunak as out of touch, but today the accusations sounded more plausible than ever. And Sunak was strikingly short on retaliatory material. At one point Sunak and CCHQ were obsessive about the Labour £28bn green plan being a ladder to higher taxes, but Starmer’s repeated denials on this front may have closed that down a bit.
Instead Sunak was left primarily with the “don’t let Labour take Britain back to square one” line he deployed on Monday. In a country where square one sounds like an improvement on what we have, that did not work then, and it did not work today.
Updated
Alex Norris (Lab) asks if Sunak had a meeting with a donor who gave him £38,000 for the use of a private jet. He is referring to this story.
Sunak says all his donations are declared in the normal way.
Sunak says the government thinks there is a “very good basis” for the power-sharing executive to be restored in Northern Ireland.
Caroline Ansell (Con) asks about the concerns of those who object to children being told they can be born the wrong sex. She asks if parents will be involved in the consultation on the new trans guidance for schools.
Sunak says parents are being consulted. And people should be free to stress the importance of biological sex, he says.
Updated
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, says post office operators never stood a chance against the Westminster establishment.
Sunak says this is one of the greatest scandals in history. The government has set up an inquiry, and set up three different compensation schemes. But the government is going further. That is why it has announced a new law today.
Flynn says this is not just about subpostmasters. Ask the Waspi women, or the victims of the infected blood inquiry, or the victims of Hillsborough. “They are angry at Westminster because they know that this place never really changes, does it?”
Sunak says he is sad Flynn is trying to politicise this.
(He did not say that to Lee Anderson – see 12.03pm.)
Updated
Starmer says Sunak is out of touch. He just sees the country from his private jet, and does not know schools where pupils don’t turn up.
Doesn’t the country deserve so much better than a prime minister who simply doesn’t get Britain?
Sunak says the government has just cut tax. Starmer does not have a single idea, he says. He says the Tories have a plan, and Labour would just take Britain back to square one.
Starmer says he spent five years of his life as DPP fighting people-smuggling gangs. He says services are collapsing. People are literally pulling out their own teeth because they cannot get access to NHS dentistry. He says Sunak “spent his time boasting whilst Britain is breaking”.
Sunak says Labour has no plan for the future. He says Labour is controlled by the unions.
Updated
Starmer says Sunak cannot be honest because he is afraid of his own party.
Sunak says Starmer is someone who thinks all immigration laws are racist.
Starmer ridicules Sunak's U-turns over election messaging and dubs him 'Mr Nobody'
Starmer says he does believe in stopping the people-smuggling gangs.
He goes on:
Mr Speaker, last year, [Sunak] started the year saying he was Mr Steady. Then he was Mr Change. Now he’s flipped back to Mr More of the Same. It doesn’t matter how many relaunches and flip-flops he does. He’ll always be Mr Nobody.
Sunak again attacks Starmer for refusing to back the government’s immigration policy, and says Starmer puts the criminal gangs ahead of the British people every time.
Updated
Starmer says Sunak has been caught red-handed. Who should MPs believe? The Sunak before us today, or the one “who used to believe in something”.
Sunak says Starmer picks the people smugglers over the needs of the British people.
Updated
Keir Starmer welcomes the Post Office announcement.
He says one Tory MP had considerable doubts about Boris Johnson’s Rwanda scheme when it was announced. What has happened to that MP?
Sunak says Starmer is talking about a document (leaked to the BBC) that he has not seen and Starmer has not seen. He says he wants to stop the boats, unlike Starmer.
Sunak says government will legislate to exonerate victims of Post Office Horizon scandal
Lee Anderson, the Tory party deputy chair, says Ed Davey was in charge during the Post Office scandal. Davey has called for more than 30 people to resign over mistakes. Does the PM agree Davey should resign too?
Sunak says this is one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in history. He says the inquiry is under way and almost £150m has been paid in compensation.
But he says the government will introduce primary legislation to ensure those convicted are exonerated.
And he announced an extra £75,000 compensation payment for victims.
UPDATE: Sunak said:
This is one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in our nation’s history.
People who worked hard to serve their communities had their lives and their reputations destroyed through absolutely no fault of their own. The victims must get justice and compensation …
Today I can announce that we will introduce new primary legislation to make sure that those convicted as a result of the Horizon scandal are swiftly exonerated and compensated.
We will also introduce a new up-front payment of £75,000 for the vital GLO (group litigation order) group of postmasters.
Updated
Rishi Sunak starts with the usual spiel about the meetings he is having.
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question at PMQs.
Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs
Rishi Sunak is about to take PMQs for the first time this year.
Scottish ministers will discuss Fujitsu contracts related to local elections counts following criticism of the firm’s role in the Post Office IT scandal.
Speaking to the BBC on Wednesday, Holyrood’s justice minister Angela Constance said she would speak with fellow ministers about the deal signed in 2020 to support electronic vote counts for local elections. She said:
That wouldn’t necessarily be a matter for me as justice secretary, that may be a matter for the government as a whole and for other ministers but I shall certainly discuss it with other ministers.
Her comments came after a BBC freedom of information request revealed that Scotland’s prosecution service became aware of possible problems with the Horizon software system a decade ago.
In Scotland the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service had sole responsibility for prosecuting Horizon cases and, although they estimate up to 100 individuals may have been affected, only two convictions in Scotland have so far been overturned.
Constance added that she was committed to achieving justice for those wrongly convicted, but that any legal recourse must preserve their right to compensation under the UK-wide scheme.
Rishi Sunak is facing a revolt by Tory MPs later today when the Commons votes to give the economic activity of public bodies (overseas activities) bill a third reading. The vote will take place early in the evening, after MPs have debated the finance bill. Aubrey Allegretti from the Times says around a dozen Conservatives will refuse to vote for the bill.
Rishi Sunak faces his first rebellion of the new year later today.
I’m told around a dozen Tory MPs - led by former cabinet minister Kit Malthouse - will likely not vote for the third reading of the anti-BDS bill.
Rishi Sunak faces his first rebellion of the new year later today.
— Aubrey Allegretti (@breeallegretti) January 10, 2024
I'm told around a dozen Tory MPs - led by former cabinet minister Kit Malthouse - will likely not vote for the third reading of the anti-BDS bill.
The bill, which was introduced by Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, in the last session of parliament and which has been carried over, is intended to stop councils and other public authorities conducting boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns against other countries, but it is seen as designed primarily to stop leftwing councils implementing anti-Israel boycotts.
Labour has tabled a reasoned amendment saying the bill should not get a third reading. Explaining why, it says:
It does not effectively address the problem it rightly seeks to solve, is incompatible with international law and UN Security Council Resolutions, risks undermining support for groups around the world facing persecution, includes needlessly broad and sweeping draconian powers while placing unprecedented restrictions on public bodies to express a view on current and proposed policy and represents a major departure from the UK Government’s long-established diplomatic position on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Golan Heights, in a way that undermines the UK’s future credibility and capacity to support diplomatic negotiations towards a just and lasting peace in Israel and Palestine based on a two-state solution, at a time when consistent support for that objective is more important than ever.
Senior police officers think ministers have subjected them to 'improper pressure', watchdog says
Police chiefs believe “senior political figures” are subjecting them to improper pressure or interference, the official policing inspectorate today says.
The finding will be seen as a direct reference to the former home secretary Suella Braverman and comes after the government and senior officers clashed over the policing of protests.
Braverman had asked Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services to examine alleged political bias in policing. Today the inspectorate released an update via a letter to the current home secretary James Cleverly.
In November government wanted a pro-Palestinian march on Armistice Day in central London to be stopped, but police insisted there were no powers to do so.
Police in the United Kingdom are supposed to be operationally independent from interference from politicians.
In a letter released today, Andy Cooke, His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary wrote:
One of the most consistent themes in the evidence we have obtained so far is the extent to which senior national political figures directly or indirectly influence, or attempt to influence, police operations.
Senior police leaders told us that when this takes place in public, it makes it harder to maintain an appearance of impartiality. Most senior officers told us that they experience what they believe to be improper pressure or interference from significant political figures, whether through direct contact or through the media. Many cited this commission and the associated correspondence as one example of this …
Recent events concerning the policing of protests have highlighted the need for greater understanding as to what is meant by the term ‘operational independence’.
The inquiry was ordered last year in a letter to the inspectorate in September 2023 Setting out her reasons, Braverman said:
I am concerned that public displays of allegiance with political causes opens some forces up to accusations of virtue-signalling, and that related activity by others (such as staff networks), is having a negative effect on community confidence.
That effect may be felt by either distracting policing from its core role of preventing and detecting crime and bringing offenders to justice or by giving the impression that policing is distracted from that role. The essential function of the police is to uphold the law. I am concerned that resources which might otherwise have been allocated to dealing with thefts, robberies and assaults are giving way to other activities. Further, that when officers adopt or participate in political or social campaigns, for example, by taking the knee, they risk losing the support of the public. This is not common sense policing.
Braverman was sacked as home secretary in November, just after the pro-Palestinian march went ahead with far right elements clashing with police. Braverman had publicly claimed just before the march that police appeared to treat the rightwing demonstrators more harshly than those associated with progressive causes, a claim largely derided.
The letter from Cooke says the full report will be finished this year.
UPDATE: An ally of Suella Braverman said:
It’s funny how we don’t hear the police being too critical when they’re taking it upon themselves to criticise politicians’ descriptions of criminals and extremists. They should get on with their jobs instead of hiding behind an expansive and meaningless understanding of ‘operational independence’.
Updated
There are two byelections coming up in Tory seats, in Wellinborough, where Peter Bone had a majority of 18,540 in 2019, and in Kingswood, where Chris Skidmore’s majority was 11,220. According to Politico, the government is expected to move the writs for both byelections tomorrow, with Thursday 15 February earmarked as the date for both of them.
Yesterday Labour selected as its candidate Damian Egan. The Kingswood consituency is disappearing at the next election because of the boundary review, and Egan is also lined up as Labour’s candidate for Bristol North East, which takes in large chunk of the Kingswood seat, at the general election. LabourList has a profile of Egan here.
Speaker allows Commons urgent question on Post Office Horizon scandal after PMQs
The Commons authorities have announced that there will be an urgent question on “compensation and outstanding matters relating to the Post Office Horizon scandal” at around 12.30pm, just after PMQs. The UQ has been tabled by the Conservative MP David Davis.
This helps to explain why, in his interview with the Today programme this morning, Kevin Hollinrake, the minister for postal services, was not able to confirm that he would be attending the meeting of the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board due to take place at 1.30pm. Hollinrake told the programme that he was not sure what parliamentary duties he would have in the afternoon that might stop him going.
This morning the Daily Telegraph has splashed on a story claiming that one of the key engineers who designed the flawed Horizon IT system that led to sub-post office operators being wrongly convicted is saying he won’t give evidence to the inquiry into the scandal unless he gets immunity.
TELEGRAPH: Architect of postal scandal demands immunity #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/gVgvcHq9xT
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) January 9, 2024
Asked about the story in an interview this morning, Kevin Hollinrake, the minister for postal services, said:
That’s absolutely the wrong approach for that person to take if those reports are true. The statutory inquiry does have the power to make sure that witnesses do give evidece, but clearly our crime agencies and police definitely have that power.
Phase 1 of HS2 from London to Birmingham could now cost as much as £66.6bn, MPs told
The estimated cost of building HS2 between London and Birmingham has soared to as much as £66.6bn, HS2 Ltd executive chairman Sir Jon Thompson said.
As PA Media reports, Thompson told the Commons transport committee this morning that the estimated cost for phase 1 is between £49bn and £56.6bn at 2019 prices, but adjusting the range for current prices involves “adding somewhere between £8bn and £10bn”. He went on:
It is the government’s longstanding policy that infrastructure estimates are only updated at spending review points, that’s my understanding of it.
So that’s why we’re still working to 2019 prices and the whole conversation about 2019, which is to be frank with you an administrative burden of some significance in the organisation.
Updated
Here is the Commons paper with the latest amendments tabled to the Rwanda bill. Dan Bloom has been taking a look for Politico’s London Playbook. He says:
Some 35 right-wingers so far are behind an amendment by Tory veteran Bill Cash (amendment number 10) to put “notwithstanding” clauses back in the bill — letting it defy international law.
They’re also backing a flood of amendments by ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick, including to … block most “suspensive claims” by migrants against their removal (19-22) … disapply the Human Rights Act to the new bill and last year’s Illegal Migration Act (11-18) … and make it the “default” that “rule 39” orders from the European court of human rights are not binding (23-25).
Updated
Jenrick and Braverman tell PM Rwanda bill won't work as rightwing Tories back amendments to make it tougher
Rishi Sunak is braced for a Commons showdown over his Rwanda plan after being warned by Tory MPs that the proposal will not work unless it is significantly beefed up, PA Media reports. PA says:
As the right wing of the Conservative party gears up for a parliamentary battle, the prime minister was warned by the former immigration minister Robert Jenrick that the plan “simply doesn’t work” in its current form.
Dozens of rightwing Conservatives are backing amendments to the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill aimed at effectively ignoring international law and to severely limit individual migrants’ ability to resist being put on a flight to Kigali.
Jenrick refused to say whether he would vote for the legislation if it were not rewritten.
“This is the third piece of legislation in three years. It’s three strikes or you’re out, we’ve got to get this right,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today this morning.
The measures Jenrick and his allies are pushing would end what he called the “merry-go-round of individual claims whereby illegal migrants claim every possible defence in order to frustrate their removal to Rwanda” and would prevent flights being grounded by emergency injunctions from the European court of human rights.
The government’s bill and a treaty with Rwanda are intended to make the scheme legally watertight following a supreme court ruling against the plan.
But Jenrick said: “[The] government’s reported legal advice is that the bill has a 50% chance at best of getting a single flight off to Rwanda before the general election. When the stakes are so high for the country I don’t think that’s acceptable. We need to make sure it’s much more rigorous than that.”
Jenrick said the amendments aimed at toughening up the Rwanda bill were in line with international law, one of the tests set by Sunak for any changes as the Kigali government has warned the deal could fall apart if the UK breaks international conventions.
Former home secretary Suella Braverman, who backs the changes put forward by Jenrick and Sir Bill Cash, said: “To not adopt these amendments, and introduce another failing bill, will be a betrayal of the British people.”
Writing in the Daily Mail, she said: “As drafted, this bill will not stop the boats. The government’s own lawyers have also reportedly advised that the scheme, as currently laid out, is fundamentally flawed. They rightly conclude that it will be bogged down with individual legal challenges from migrants.”
Updated
Ministers prioritised driving in England partly due to conspiracy theories
Ministers decided to prioritise driving over active travel because of worries among ministers about “15-minute cities”, documents seen by the Guardian show. They indicate that a significant shift in transport policy was guided at least in part by conspiracy theories. Peter Walker has the story here.
Minister claims government considering plan to quash all unsafe Post Office convictions before ITV drama
Good morning. Kevin Hollinrake, a minister in the department for business, has been doing a morning interview round this morning. Normally when a junior minister does the morning interview round they end up being asked topics about which they know not much more than you or me, but today the interviews were a bit more illuminating than normal. Hollinrake is minister for postal services, and so he is well briefed on the story of the day, but he is also an MP who was taking an interest in the Post Office Horizon scandal even before he joined the government.
Rishi Sunak is taking PMQs at noon and, after Alex Chalk, the justice secretary, told MPs yesterday that an announcement about a possible move to quash all the unsafe Post Office convictions in one go might be coming soon, there is intense speculation that Sunak will unveil the news in the chamber. Prime ministers always like to be identified with “good” government announcements, and having a “story” like this up your sleeve is a very useful defence mechanism at PMQs. In his interviews Hollinrake did not confirm that the announcement would come today, but he said it was “very, very close”.
He also claimed that this was not soley a response to the ITV drama, Mr Bates vs The Post Office, which propelled this long-running scandal to the very top of the news agenda. In an interview on the Today programme, when Justin Webb put it to him that the government was previously not interested in a blanket move quashing all these unsafe convictions, and that “the only thing that has changed is the ITV drama”, Hollinrake replied:
Not true. We’ve been looking at this for some time. The advisory board we work closely with is very engaged in this. We’ve been dissatisfied with a number of people have come forward trying to overturn those convictions. So this has been something we’ve been deliberating for some time.
Hollinrake was referring to the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board. This is due to meet today at 1.30pm, and that may be one factor that prevents a PMQs announcement, because the government will want to have its approval for whatever it announces.
In his Today interview Hollinrake said he welcomed the decision by Paula Vennells, the former Post Office boss, to hand back her CBE. But he could not explain why she was given the award in 2019, when a great deal was already known about the unsafe conditions. Hollinrake said giving her the CBE in the first place “was a mistake”.
Vennells is now under pressure to give back the bonuses she received for her work as head of the Post Office. The Daily Mail has splashed on this idea approvingly.
MAIL: Now give back your millions #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/VBl3KdrTpI
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) January 9, 2024
Hollinrake did not support calls for Vennells to have to return bonus payments – or at least not now. He told Today:
One thing we should not have is trial by media. I think we should let the inquiry run its course. It should report and identify individuals and organisations responsible. At that point in time then sanctions can be placed on those individuals.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10.30am: Chris Philp, the policing minister, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee about the impact of police commissioners.
10.30am: Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, gives evidence to the Commons business committee about investment zones and freeports.
12pm: Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.
2.15pm: Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, gives evidence to the Commons Treasury committee.
3pm: Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, and other experts give evidence to the joint committee on human rights on the Rwanda bill.
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
