Sajid Javid has told Sky News he wants to remove the PCR test requirement for travellers returning from some foreign countries “as soon as I possibly can”.
The health secretary said he was aware of the cost for families holidaying abroad and that the measure should not be in place “for a second longer than is absolutely necessary”.
Mr Javid said he had asked officials to remove the rule “at the moment we can”.
Image: Sajid Javid said PCR tests are costly for families looking to holiday abroad
Meanwhile, the health secretary also told Sky News he did not “like the idea” of vaccine passports and hoped to “avoid” introducing them.
“We have got a huge number of defences; of course we still want to remain very cautious, and there are some things that – when it comes to travel for example – there are some rules that are going to have to remain in place,” Mr Javid told Sky News’ Trevor Phillips on Sunday.
Advertisement
“But the PCR test that is required upon your return to the UK from certain countries, look, I want to try and get rid of that as soon as I possibly can.
“I am not going to make that decision right now, but I have already asked officials that at the moment we can, let’s get rid of these kind of intrusions, the costs that generates for families, particularly families just trying to go out and holiday.
More on Covid-19
Related Topics:
“We shouldn’t be keeping anything like that in place for a second longer than is absolutely necessary.”
Image: Last month, the government announced the cost of NHS coronavirus tests for international travel were being reduced from £88 to £68 each
At present, passengers returning from green list countries, or amber list destinations if they are fully vaccinated, must take PCR tests on or before day two after they arrive in England.
Last month, the government announced the cost of NHS coronavirus tests for international travel were being reduced from £88 to £68 each, with the sum for two rests reducing from £170 to £136.
The travel industry, which has been hammered by the pandemic, has long complained that the costs of tests are too high.
In August, Mr Javid announced a “rapid internal review” of prices charged by government-approved companies after claims holidaymakers were being exploited over private testing.
Asked on Sky News whether Labour would support scrapping the need for PCR tests to be taken by those travelling internationally, shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth said his party “will have to see what the proposal is when it comes before Parliament”.
Mr Ashworth added that, “at first sight”, reports of the government plans “looks like a reasonable approach”.
Image: International travellers returning to Wales will be offered a wider choice of COVID test providers from 21 September
The debate comes as the Welsh government announced that international travellers returning to Wales will be offered a wider choice of COVID test providers from 21 September.
The Welsh government said in a statement it would make the change from September 21 as “new standards and spot checks are being introduced, which will help to address long-standing concerns and issues about the market for PCR tests” for those returning to the UK.
Meanwhile, on the use of vaccine passports, Mr Javid said the government would not introduce the measure unless there is “no alternative”.
“I think if we went down the road of vaccine passports or vaccine certification as it is sometimes called, that is a big decision for any government to make,” the health secretary told Sky’s Trevor Phillips on Sunday.
Image: The travel industry has long complained that the costs of tests are too high
“We have been looking at that, we have been open about that, instinctively I do not like the idea at all of people having to, let’s say, present papers to do basic things.
“So if we do that, it has to be something that is looked at very carefully and something that we believe has to be done with no alternative.”
The health secretary said “rising” vaccination rates should be taken into account when making “a final decision” on whether vaccine passports should be used, adding: “But I hope we can avoid it.”
He continued: “I am not here today to rule that out, we haven’t made a final decision as a government.
“We have been looking at it, we have been very open about that, but as I have said, I think that if we did something like that it has to be supported by the evidence and it has to be something that is absolutely, absolutely necessary with no alternative.
“So as I say, I hope we can avoid it.”
Image: Sajid Javid told Sky News he does not like the idea of vaccine passports and that they would only be brought in if there is ‘no alternative’
Earlier this week, Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden said an extension to use of vaccine passports will be looked at if there is a “public health need”.
Mr Dowden told Sky News the government “want as few restrictions for as short a period as possible”, but that if the situation with coronavirus worsens, ministers will consider requiring vaccine certification to attend more venues to “protect” the public.
The culture secretary did, however, emphasise that the government is “always reluctant to impose further burdens on businesses unless we really have to”.
COVID-19 certification will be required to enter events such as nightclubs, music festivals and some football grounds, Ms Sturgeon said.
MSPs in Holyrood voted by 68 to 55 in favour of the measure which will be introduced from 1 October after all Scottish adults have had the opportunity to receive both COVID-19 vaccines, with two weeks having passed to allow the vaccine to take effect.
Speaking on Sky’s Trevor Phillips on Sunday, Ms Sturgeon said the measure “is part of a package of measures, it has a part to play”.
“Anybody who thinks there is one single magic wand solution to this virus probably haven’t learned a lot over the last 18 months, and secondly, any measure we take has upsides and it has downsides.”
She added: “This is a very limited scheme, it is in fact similar to what is being proposed in England as well, and it has a part to play.”
Labour’s welfare reforms bill has passed, with 335 MPs voting in favour and 260 against.
It came after the government watered down the bill earlier this evening, making a dramatic last-minute concession to the demands of would-be rebel MPs who were concerned about the damage the policy would do to disabled people.
The government has a working majority of 166, so it would have taken 84 rebels to defeat the bill.
In total, 49 Labour MPs still voted against the bill despite the concessions. No MPs from other parties voted alongside the government, although three MPs elected for Labour who have since had the whip removed did so.
Which Labour MPs rebelled?
Last week, 127 Labour MPs signed what they called a “reasoned amendment”, a letter stating their objection to the bill as it was.
The government responded with some concessions to try and win back the rebels, which was enough to convince some of them. But they were still ultimately forced to make more changes today.
In total, 68 MPs who signed the initial “reasoned amendment” eventually voted in favour of the bill.
Nine in 10 MPs elected for the first time at the 2024 general election voted with the government.
That compares with fewer than three quarters of MPs who were voted in before that.
A total of 42 Labour MPs also voted in favour of an amendment that would have stopped the bill from even going to a vote at all. That was voted down by 328 votes to 149.
How does the rebellion compare historically?
If the wording of the bill had remained unchanged and 127 MPs or more had voted against it on Tuesday, it would have been up there as one of the biggest rebellions in British parliamentary history.
As it happened, it was still higher than the largest recorded during Tony Blair’s first year as PM, when 47 of his Labour colleagues (including Diane Abbott, John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn, who also voted against the bill on Tuesday) voted no to his plan to cut benefits for single-parent families.
The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
A 92-year-old man has been sentenced to life with a minimum term of 20 years in prison for the rape and murder of an elderly widow nearly 60 years ago.
Ryland Headley was found guilty on Monday of killing 75-year-old Louisa Dunne at her Bristol home in June 1967, in what is thought to be the UK’s longest cold case to reach trial, and has been told by the judge he “will die in prison”.
The mother-of-two’s body was found by neighbours after Headley, then a 34-year-old railway worker, forced his way inside the terraced house in the Easton area before attacking her.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:09
The UK’s longest cold case to reach trial
Police found traces of semen and a palm print on one of the rear windows inside the house – but it was about 20 years before DNA testing.
The case remained unsolved for more than 50 years until Avon and Somerset detectives sent off items from the original investigation and found a DNA match to Headley.
He had moved to Suffolk after the murder and served a prison sentence for raping two elderly women in 1977.
Prosecutors said the convictions showed he had a “tendency” to break into people’s homes at night and, in some cases, “target an elderly woman living alone, to have sex with her despite her attempts to fend him off, and to threaten violence”.
Image: Louisa Dunne in 1933. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Headley during his arrest. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Headley, from Ipswich, who did not give evidence, denied raping and murdering Ms Dunne, but was found guilty of both charges after a trial at Bristol Crown Court.
Detectives said forces across the country are investigating whether Headley could be linked to other unsolved crimes.
Mrs Dunne’s granddaughter, Mary Dainton, who was 20 when her relative was killed, told the court that her murder “had a big impact on my mother, my aunt and her family.
“I don’t think my mother ever recovered from it. The anxiety caused by her mother’s brutal rape and murder clouded the rest of her life.
“The fact the offender wasn’t caught caused my mother to become and remain very ill.
“When people found out about the murder, they withdrew from us. In my experience, there is a stigma attached to rape and murder.”
Image: The front of Louisa Dunne’s home. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Louisa Dunne’s skirt. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Finding out her grandmother’s killer had been caught after almost six decades “turned my life upside down,” she said.
“I feel sad and very tired, which has affected the relationships I have with those close to me. I didn’t expect to deal with something of such emotional significance at this stage of my life.
“It saddens me deeply that all the people who knew and loved Louisa are not here to see that justice has been done.”
Image: Palmprint images. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
After her statement, Mr Justice Sweeting told Mrs Dainton: “It is not easy to talk about matters like this in public.
“Thank you very much for doing it in such a clear and dignified way.”
The judge told Headley his crimes showed “a complete disregard for human life and dignity.
“Mrs Dunne was vulnerable, she was a small elderly woman living alone. You treated her as a means to an end.
“The violation of her home, her body and ultimately her life was a pitiless and cruel act by a depraved man.
“She must have experienced considerable pain and fear before her death,” he said.
Sentencing Headley to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 20 years, the judge told him: “You will never be released, you will die in prison.”
Detective Inspector Dave Marchant of Avon and Somerset Police said Headley was “finally facing justice for the horrific crimes he committed against Louisa in 1967.
“The impact of this crime has cast a long shadow over the city and in particular Louisa’s family, who have had to deal with the sadness and trauma ever since.”
The officer praised Ms Dainton’s “resilience and courage” during what he called a “unique” case and thanked investigators from his own force, as well as South West Forensics, detectives from Suffolk Constabulary, the National Crime Agency and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Three managers at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
They were in senior roles at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and have been bailed pending further enquiries, Cheshire Constabulary said. Their names have not been made public.
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the hospital’s neonatal unit.
Detective Superintendent Paul Hughes explained that gross negligent manslaughter focuses on the “action or inaction of individuals”.
There is also an investigation into corporate manslaughter at the hospital, which began in October 2023.
That focuses on “senior leadership and their decision-making”, Mr Hughes said. The intention there is to determine whether any “criminality has taken place concerning the response to the increased levels of fatalities”.
The scope was widened to include gross negligence manslaughter in March of this year.
Image: Lucy Letby was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more
Mr Hughes said it is “important to note” that this latest development “does not impact on the convictions of Lucy Letby for multiple offences of murder and attempted murder”.
He added: “Both the corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter elements of the investigation are continuing and there are no set timescales for these.
“Our investigation into the deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester Hospital and the Liverpool Women’s Hospital between the period of 2012 to 2016 is also ongoing.”
Earlier this year, lawyers for Lucy Letby called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.