Connect with us

Published

on

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has highlighted the importance of engaging with the Taliban as he acknowledged the need “to face up to the new reality in Afghanistan”.

While not recognising the militant group as the government in Kabul, the cabinet minister pointed to the necessity of having “a direct line of communication” to discuss a range of pressing issues, including the safe passage of remaining British citizens and Afghan allies.

Speaking during a visit to Pakistan, Mr Raab said it would not have been possible to evacuate some 15,000 people without some degree of cooperation with the Taliban, who seized power after the withdrawal of US forces, ending a 20-year military intervention.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What weapons were left behind in Afghanistan?

He told a news conference: “We need to face up to the new reality in Afghanistan.”

Pointing to the appointment of a new chargé d’affaires for Afghanistan based in Doha, Qatar, the foreign secretary said: “The approach that we are taking is we don’t recognise the Taliban as a government… but we do see the importance of being able to engage and have a direct line of communication.

“The reason being is clearly there are a whole range of issues that need to be discussed, including first and foremost at the moment the question of safe passage of British nationals and the Afghans who worked for the UK government.

“We need to be able to convey direct messages on these things. We need to be able to have that dialogue.”

More on Afghanistan

He added: “The Taliban has made a series of undertakings. Some of them are positive at the level of words, but we need to test them and see that they translate into deeds. We cannot do that unless we have at least some channel of dialogue.”

Mr Raab said the Taliban need to create a “safe and secure environment” to allow aid to reach people in Afghanistan.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Taliban’s mock funeral for Western nations

He said: “No-one wants to see the economic and social fabric of Afghanistan collapse, I can’t see how that would be in the interest of the Taliban let alone ordinary Afghans, we certainly don’t want to see that happen

“We would be willing not to fund aid via the Taliban, but through the humanitarian organisations that operate inside Afghanistan – for that to happen there needs to be a safe and secure environment, so that’s an early test for the Taliban.

“But we’re willing to make sure we do our bit, along with the national community to fund the humanitarian agencies, the lifeline for ordinary Afghans, but there needs to be a safe environment for that.

“We’ll also support those regional partners, particularly like Pakistan who I can imagine is very concerned about the risk of numbers coming across the border, we want to make sure we can support those partners in the region [to] deal with that.

“That’s the holistic approach, the strategic approach we are taking.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

UK thought Kabul would not fall in 2021

Mr Raab, who has faced criticism over his handling of the Afghanistan crisis, also insisted there was “common widespread surprise”, even among the Taliban, at the speed in which they had taken over Afghanistan.

He said: “The takeover I think it’s fair to say was faster than anyone anticipated, not just the United Kingdom or NATO allies, but I was talking with our friends here.

“And I suspect the Taliban and ordinary Afghans were taken by surprise.

“I think there was a common widespread surprise at the speed with which the consolidation of power happened.”

Mr Raab’s comments came as the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into the chaotic retreat from Afghanistan.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Taliban celebrates as last US troops leave Kabul

Committee chairman Tom Tugendhat said: “The fall of Kabul is a catastrophe for the Afghan people and for the reputation of those nations that were committed to its success.

“Our hasty withdrawal leaves a country in an acute humanitarian and human rights crisis.

“The Afghan people, who we worked alongside for many years, have been left at the mercy of the Taliban, a vicious fundamentalist group.”

He said that “big questions remain” and the inquiry aimed to provide “some much-needed clarity”.

“Lessons need to be learnt and the decisions the UK makes in the coming months will be crucial,” he added.

Follow the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker

Continue Reading

Politics

Peers back assisted dying bill – but battles lie ahead

Published

on

By

Peers back assisted dying bill - but battles lie ahead

The controversial assisted dying bill is still very much alive, having received a second reading in the House of Lords without a vote.

But that doesn’t tell the whole story. Day two of debate on the bill in the Lords was just as passionate and emotional as the first, a week earlier.

And now comes the hard part for supporters of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, as opponents attempt to make major changes in the months ahead.

The Lords’ chamber was again packed for the debate, which this time began at 10am and lasted nearly six hours. In all, during 13 hours of debate over two days, nearly 200 peers spoke.

According to one estimate, over both days of the debate only around 50 peers spoke in favour of the bill and considerably more than 100 against, with only a handful neutral.

The bill proposes allowing terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death. Scotland’s parliament has already passed a similar law.

Pro-assisted dying campaigners outside parliament earlier this month. Pic: PA
Image:
Pro-assisted dying campaigners outside parliament earlier this month. Pic: PA

In a safeguard introduced in the Commons, an application would have to be approved by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior lawyer and psychiatrist.

The bill’s sponsor in the Lords, Charlie Falconer, said while peers have “a job of work to do”, elected MPs in the Commons should have the final decision on the bill, not unelected peers.

One of the most contentious moments in the first day of debate last Friday was a powerful speech by former Tory prime minister Theresa May, who said the legislation was a “licence to kill” bill.

That claim prompted angry attacks on the former PM when the debate resumed from Labour peers, who said it had left them dismayed and caused distress to many terminally ill people.

The former PM, daughter of a church of England vicar, had claimed in her speech that the proposed law was an “assisted suicide bill” and “effectively says suicide is OK”.

But opening the second day’s debate, Baroness Thornton, a lay preacher and health minister in Tony Blair’s government, said: “People have written to me in the last week, very distressed.

“They say things such as: ‘We are not suicidal – we want to live – but we are dying, and we do not have the choice or ability to change that. Assisted dying is not suicide’.”

Throughout the criticism of her strong opposition to the bill, the former PM sat rooted to her seat, not reacting visibly but looking furious as her critics attacked her.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Assisted Dying: Reflections at the end of life

There was opposition to the bill, too, from grandees of the Thatcher and Major cabinets. Lord Deben, formerly John Gummer and an ex-member of the Church of England synod, said the bill “empowers the state to kill”.

And Lord Chris Patten, former Tory chairman, Hong Kong governor and Oxford University chancellor, said it was an “unholy legislative mess” and could lead to death becoming the “default solution to perceived suffering”.

Read more:
Paralympian targeted with abuse for opposing assisted dying bill
The assisted dying debate has been politics – but not as we know it

Day two of the debate also saw an unholy clash between Church of England bishops past and present, with former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey claiming opponents led by Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell were out of touch with public opinion.

While a large group of bishops sat in their full robes on their benches, Lord Carey suggested both the Church and the Lords would “risk our legitimacy by claiming that we know better than both the public” and the Commons.

“Do we really want to stand in the way of this bill?” he challenged peers. “It will pass, whether in this session or the next. It has commanding support from the British public and passed the elected House after an unprecedented period of scrutiny.”

But Archbishop Cottrell hit back, declaring he was confident he represented “views held by many, not just Christian leaders, but faith leaders across our nation in whom I’ve been in discussion and written to me”.

And he said the bill was wrong “because it ruptures relationships” and would “turbocharge” the agonising choices facing poor and vulnerable people.

A campaigner in opposition of the bill. Pic: PA
Image:
A campaigner in opposition of the bill. Pic: PA

One of the most powerful speeches came from former Tory MP Craig Mackinlay, awarded a peerage by Rishi Sunak after a dramatic Commons comeback after losing his arms and legs after a bout of sepsis.

He shocked peers by revealing that in Belgium, terminally ill children as young as nine had been euthanised. “I’m concerned we want to embed an option for death in the NHS when its modus operandi should be for life,” he said.

And appearing via video link, a self-confessed “severely disabled” Tory peer, Kevin Shinkwin, was listened to in a stunned silence as he said the legislation amounted to the “stuff of nightmares”.

He said it would give the state “a licence to kill the wrong type of people”, adding: “I’m the wrong type. This bill effectively puts a price on my head.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Assisted Dying vote: Both sides react

After the debate, Labour peer and former MP Baroness Luciana Berger, an opponent of the bill, claimed a victory after peers accepted her proposal to introduce a special committee to examine the bill and report by 7 November.

“The introduction of a select committee is a victory for those of us that want proper scrutiny of how these new laws would work, the massive changes they could make to the NHS and how we treat people at the end of their lives,” she told Sky News.

“It’s essential that as we look at these new laws we get a chance to hear from those government ministers and professionals that would be in charge of creating and running any new assisted dying system.”

After the select committee reports, at least four sitting Fridays in the Lords have been set aside for all peers – a Committee of the whole house – to debate the bill and propose amendments.

Report stage and third reading will follow early next year, then the bill goes back to the Commons for debate on any Lords amendments. There’s then every chance of parliamentary ping pong between the two Houses.

Kim Leadbeater’s bill may have cleared an important hurdle in the Lords. But there’s still a long way to go – and no doubt a fierce battle ahead – before it becomes law.

Continue Reading

Politics

UK and Ireland agree deal to address ‘unfinished business’ of the Troubles

Published

on

By

UK and Ireland agree deal to address 'unfinished business' of the Troubles

The UK and Irish governments have agreed a new framework to address the legacy of the Northern Ireland Troubles.

The framework, announced by Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn and the Irish deputy prime minister, Simon Harris, at Hillsborough Castle on Friday, replaces the controversial Legacy Act, introduced by the Conservative government.

“I believe that this framework, underpinned by new co-operation from both our governments, represents the best way forward to finally make progress on the unfinished business of the Good Friday Agreement,” said Mr Benn.

He added that it would allow the families of victims killed during violence in Northern Ireland between the 1960s and 1990s, to “find the answers they have long been seeking”.

The proposed framework includes a dedicated Legacy Commission to investigate deaths during the Troubles, a resumption of inquests regarding cases from the conflict which were halted by the Legacy Act.

There will also be a separate truth recovery mechanism, the Independent Commission on Information Retrieval, jointly funded by London and Dublin.

“Dealing with the legacy of the Troubles is hard, and that is why it has been for so long the unfinished business of the Good Friday Agreement,” said Mr Benn.

More on Politics

Mr Harris described the framework as a “night and day improvement” on the previous act. Scrapping the Legacy Act, introduced in 2023, was a Labour government pledge.

What this means

A section of the Legacy Act offered immunity from prosecution for ex-soldiers and militants who cooperate with a new investigative body. This provision was ruled incompatible with human rights law.

The 2023 law was opposed by all political parties in Northern Ireland, including pro-British and Irish nationalist groups.

The agreement replaces a controversial law. (Pic: PA)
Image:
The agreement replaces a controversial law. (Pic: PA)

The Irish government, which brought a legal challenge against Britain at the European Court of Human Rights, also opposed it.

Both governments said the new plans will ensure it is possible to refer cases for potential prosecutions.

Sir Keir Starmer's Labour government had pledged to improve relations with Ireland. (Pic: PA)
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour government had pledged to improve relations with Ireland. (Pic: PA)

It will ‘take time’ to win families’ confidence

Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Harris, said in a statement that the framework could deliver on Ireland’s two tests of being human rights-compliant and securing the support of victims’ families, if implemented in good faith.

He added that winning the confidence of victims’ families would take time.

Dublin will revisit its legal challenge against Britain if the tests are met, it said.

Restoring strained relations

The UK’s Labour government had sought to reset relations with Ireland, after they were damaged by the process of Britain leaving the European Union.

The Conservative government had defended its previous approach, arguing prosecutions were unlikely to lead to convictions, and that it wanted to draw a line under the conflict.

A number of trials have collapsed in recent years, but the first former British soldier to be convicted of an offence since the peace deal was given a suspended sentenced in 2023.

Continue Reading

Politics

Gary Gensler doubles down on crypto approach amid SEC sea change

Published

on

By

Gary Gensler doubles down on crypto approach amid SEC sea change

Gary Gensler doubles down on crypto approach amid SEC sea change

The former SEC chair and Paul Atkins, the current head of the agency, both made media appearance this week to address significant policies proposed by US President Donald Trump.

Continue Reading

Trending