Connect with us

Published

on

Police officers who are found guilty of gross misconduct will face automatic dismissal under reforms designed to toughen up the disciplinary process following a series of scandals.

Chief constables and other senior officers will be given greater powers to sack rogue staff while those who fail vetting checks can also be fired.

Under the new system, a finding of gross misconduct will automatically result in a police officer’s dismissal unless there are exceptional circumstances. Senior officers will also chair the independent panels who carry out misconduct hearings.

Read more: Rishi Sunak says it’s ‘sensible to engage’ with China – politics latest

The move comes following a series of scandals engulfing the police, including the murder of Sarah Everard by serving Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens and the unmasking of former police constable David Carrick as a serial abuser and rapist.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley, who had been pushing for changes to police regulations to make it easier to sack rogue officers, welcomed the development.

“I’m grateful to the government for recognising the need for substantial change that will empower chief officers in our fight to uphold the highest standards and restore confidence in policing,” he said.

More from Politics

“The flaws in the existing regulations have contributed to our inability to fully address the systemic issues of poor standards and misconduct.

“Chief officers are held to account for the service we deliver and for the standards we uphold which is why I have been persistent in calling for us to have the powers to act decisively and without bureaucratic delays when we identify those who have no place in policing.”

The government said it would bring in the changes as soon as possible. It is understood officials hope they could be in place by next spring.

Government ‘too slow to raise standards’

But the Labour Party said the government had been “too slow” to raise standards and that the measures announced did not go far enough.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Labour has been calling for over two years for the complete overhaul of the police misconduct and vetting systems and these reforms are long overdue.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Former Metropolitan Police officer Adam Provan has been jailed for 16 years for raping a woman and a girl.

“But as well as being too slow, the Conservatives are also not going far enough to raise standards, root out abuse and restore confidence in the vital work the police do to keep communities safe.”

She said Labour wanted police officers under investigation for rape and domestic violence to be suspended pending investigation and called for mandatory national vetting standards to end the “postcode lottery” across forces.

“We would also reform training and misconduct processes to help restore confidence in the police,” she added.

The government announcement comes just a day after six former home secretaries backed a new bill by Labour MP Harriet Harman, which would see officers automatically dismissed if convicted of a serious criminal offence, automatically suspended if charged with a serious criminal offence and automatically dismissed if they fail vetting.

Lawyers known as legally qualified chairs were brought in to oversee police disciplinary panels in 2016, in a bid to make the system more transparent.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Met Police receives damning report

But critics have argued that the system has been too slow to root out rogue officers and that senior officers are more likely to sack those found guilty of wrongdoing.

Gavin Stephens, chairman of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, welcomed the “sensible” plans, saying they put police chiefs “back in control” of being able to quickly remove corrupt staff from forces.

Concerns over ‘police chiefs marking their own homework’

Under the reforms announced today independent lawyers will continue to sit on the panel but will perform only supporting roles.

The head of the police watchdog, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) previously warned against making chief constables “judge and jury” in disciplinary hearings.

The IOPC wants lawyers to be in charge of misconduct hearings but for chief constables to decide on the punishment if wrongdoing is proven.

John Bassett, a barrister representing the National Association of Legally Qualified Chairs, speaking in a personal capacity, said he was “disappointed” by the proposed changes.

“No-one has yet explained to me or can present a convincing argument as to why the present system does not fulfil that role of being an open, transparent and fair process,” he said.

“Police officers, as so-called officers of the crown, do not have a right to claim unfair dismissal, and in those circumstances the best and at present the only way of ensuring that there is a fair outcome, if it resulted in dismissal, is by having a legally qualified chair assisting and advising the panel on the proper procedure.

Read more:
Police must investigate every theft – as home secretary challenged over number of new officers
Women’s safety in Greater Manchester Police custody under review

“Otherwise you’re going back to a situation where there is a real risk that effectively by reverting to the pre-2016 system or something similar, police officers or police chiefs are marking their own homework.

But Home Secretary Suella Braverman said: “For too long our police chiefs have not had the powers they need to root out those who have no place wearing the uniform.

“Now they can take swift and robust action to sack officers who should not be serving our communities.”

Liberal Democrats home affairs spokesman Alistair Carmichael welcomed the announcement but said: “It’s a disgrace that it’s taken so long in the first place.

“Being able to sack corrupt officers swiftly is a key step in rebuilding public trust in the police. Now, the Home Office must ensure that these new rules are properly enforced.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Coinbase CEO says the next major crypto bill is a ‘freight train’

Published

on

By

Coinbase CEO says the next major crypto bill is a ‘freight train’

Coinbase CEO says the next major crypto bill is a ‘freight train’

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said he has never been more bullish about the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act being passed after his time in Washington, DC this week.

Continue Reading

Politics

Sadiq Khan calls out Gaza ‘genocide’, as Starmer ‘delays’ recognising Palestinian state until end of Trump’s state visit

Published

on

By

Sadiq Khan calls out Gaza 'genocide', as Starmer 'delays' recognising Palestinian state until end of Trump's state visit

London’s mayor Sir Sadiq Khan has for the first time described the situation in Gaza as a “genocide”, becoming the most senior Labour figure to contradict the government’s official position.

Earlier this week, a UN Commission said a genocide was taking place in Gaza – something repeatedly denied by Israel.

Meanwhile, Sir Keir Starmer has been under pressure to raise Israel’s bombardment of the territory with Donald Trump during his state visit to the UK.

The prime minister is due to have discussions with the president today, but reports suggest he will delay formally recognising a Palestinian state until this weekend, after Mr Trump has left Britain.

It is claimed the government wants to avoid the issue dominating a news conference the two men plan to hold, according to The Times.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump meets Starmer: What can we expect?

The prime minister has found himself at odds with the US administration over the move, which is opposed to official recognition of Palestine.

The mayor of London, who has engaged in a long-running spat with Mr Trump, has added to the political tension by contradicting official Labour policy at a people’s question time event on Wednesday.

“I think it’s inescapable to draw the conclusion in Gaza we are seeing before our very eyes a genocide,” said Sir Sadiq.

Sir Keir has previously pledged to recognise Palestinian statehood ahead of next week’s United Nations General Assembly in New York if Israel does not meet a series of conditions to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Other nations, including France, Australia and Canada, have said they plan to take the same step at the UN gathering.

Explainer: What does recognising a Palestinian state mean?

The UK has consistently argued that the issue of whether Israel has committed genocide was a matter for the courts. Israel is fighting a case at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in which the country is accused of genocide.

But some opposition leaders, including Zack Polanski for the Green Party, and the Liberal Democrats’ Sir Ed Davey have specifically referred to the situation in Gaza as genocide.

Read more from Sky News:
Watch: Israel’s Gaza City offensive
MPs denied entry into West Bank

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Israel committing genocide?

On Tuesday, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory released a report, claiming: “It is clear that there is an intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza”.

It said Israel’s actions meet the criteria set down for defining a genocide.

The UK government has said its official position was it “has not concluded that Israel is acting with that [genocidal] intent“.

Israel is currently undertaking a major ground offensive in Gaza, with thousands forced to flee from Gaza City in recent days.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump-Starmer talks could be landmark moment – and join pantheon of UK-US summits

Published

on

By

Trump-Starmer talks could be landmark moment - and join pantheon of UK-US summits

In years to come, it may become known simply as Chequers ’25.

But today’s summit between Sir Keir Starmer and Donald Trump, at the prime minister’s country retreat, has the potential to be a landmark moment in UK-US history.

There’s plenty of scope for it to go horribly wrong, of course: over Jeffrey Epstein, Sir Keir’s pledge to recognise Palestine, the president’s lukewarm support for Ukraine, the Chagos Islands sell-off, or free speech.

Trump state visit live – read the latest

But on the other hand, it could be a triumph for the so-called “special relationship” – as well as relations between these two unlikely allies – with deals on trade and tariffs and an improbably blossoming bromance.

Either way, this Chequers summit – on the president’s historic second state visit to the UK – could turn out to be one of the most notable one-to-one meetings between PM and president in 20th and 21st century history.

Sir Keir and Mr Trump have already met several times, most recently at The Donald’s golf courses in Scotland in late July and, before that, memorably at the White House in February.

Donald Trump and Keir Starmer wave as they board Air Force One on a previous trip. Pic: AP
Image:
Donald Trump and Keir Starmer wave as they board Air Force One on a previous trip. Pic: AP

It was then that the PM theatrically pulled King Charles’s invitation for this week’s visit out of his inside pocket in a spectacular stunt surely masterminded by the “Prince of Darkness”, spin doctor-turned-ambassador (until last week, anyway) Peter Mandelson.

And over the years, there have been some remarkable and historic meetings and relationships, good and bad, between UK prime ministers and American presidents.

From Churchill and Roosevelt to Eden and Eisenhower, from Macmillan and JFK to Wilson and Johnson, from Thatcher and Reagan, to Blair and Bush, and from Cameron and Obama… to Starmer and Trump, perhaps?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘History’ that binds the UK and US

A brief history of relationships between PMs and presidents

Throughout UK-US history, there have been many examples of a good relationship and close bond between a Labour prime minister and a Republican president. And vice versa.

Also, it has not always been rosy between prime ministers and presidents of the two sister parties. There have been big fallings out: over Suez, Vietnam and the Caribbean island of Grenada.

Leading up to this Chequers summit, the omens have not been good.

First, the PM was forced to sack his vital link between Downing Street and the Oval Office, Lord Mandelson, over his friendship with Epstein.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump meets Starmer: What can we expect?

Second, the president arrived in the UK to a barrage of criticism from London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, who accused him of doing more than anyone else to encourage the intolerant far right across the globe.

And third, in a video-link to the ‘Unite the Kingdom’ march in London last weekend, one-time Trump ally Elon Musk called for a dissolution of parliament and a change of government and appeared to encourage violent protest.

Churchill and FDR

Churchill and FDR at the White House in 1941. Pic: AP
Image:
Churchill and FDR at the White House in 1941. Pic: AP

Back in the mid-20th century, the godfather of the “special relationship” was wartime leader Sir Winston Churchill, though it was 1946 before he first coined the phrase in a speech in the US, in which he also spoke of the “iron curtain”.

It was in 1941 that Churchill held one of the most significant meetings with a US president, Franklin D Roosevelt, at a Washington conference to plot the defeat of Germany after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbour.

Churchill arrived in Washington in December after a rough 10-day voyage on a Royal Navy battleship and stayed three weeks, spending Christmas in the White House and on Boxing Day becoming the first UK PM to address Congress.

The close bond between Churchill and Roosevelt was described as a friendship that saved the world. It was even claimed one reason the pair got on famously was that they were both renowned cigar smokers.

Churchill and Truman

Churchill and Truman catch a train from Washington in 1946. Pic: AP
Image:
Churchill and Truman catch a train from Washington in 1946. Pic: AP

After the war ended, Churchill’s “special relationship” speech, describing the alliance between the UK and US, was delivered at Westminster College, in Fulton, Missouri in March 1946.

The speech was introduced by President Harry Truman, a Democrat, with whom Churchill had attended the Potsdam Conference in 1945 to negotiate the terms of ending the war.

These two were also close friends and would write handwritten letters to each other and address one another as Harry and Winston. Mr Truman was also the only US president to visit Churchill at Chartwell, his family home.

Eden and Eisenhower

Eden and Eisenhower shake hands at the conclusion of their three-day conference in 1956. Pic: AP
Image:
Eden and Eisenhower shake hands at the conclusion of their three-day conference in 1956. Pic: AP

But the transatlantic cosiness came to an abrupt end in the 1950s, when Churchill’s Conservative successor Anthony Eden fell out badly with the Republican president Dwight Eisenhower over the Suez Crisis.

Mr Eden did visit Mr Eisenhower in Washington in January 1956, and the official record of the meeting describes the discussion as focussing on “policy differences and Cold War problems”.

Macmillan and JFK

Harold Macmillan and John F Kennedy at Andrews Air Force Base. Pic: AP
Image:
Harold Macmillan and John F Kennedy at Andrews Air Force Base. Pic: AP

But in the early 1960s, a Conservative prime minister and a Democrat president with seemingly nothing in common, the stuffy and diffident Harold Macmillan, and the charismatic John F Kennedy, repaired the damage.

They were credited with rescuing the special relationship after the rupture of the Suez Crisis, at a time of high tensions around the world: the Berlin Wall, the Cuban missile crisis, and the threat of nuclear weapons.

The two leaders exchanged handwritten notes, as well as Christmas and birthday cards. The Macmillans visited the Kennedys twice at the White House, in 1961 and 1962 – the second described in the US as a “momentous” meeting on the Cuban crisis.

The relationship was abruptly cut short in 1963 by “Supermac’s” demise prompted by the Profumo scandal, and JFK’s assassination in Dallas. But after her husband’s death, Jacqueline Kennedy was said to have had a father-daughter relationship with Macmillan, who was said to have been enchanted with her.

Wilson and LBJ

Johnson meeting with Wilson. Pic: Glasshouse Images/Shutterstock
Image:
Johnson meeting with Wilson. Pic: Glasshouse Images/Shutterstock

After JFK, the so-called “special relationship” cooled once again – and under a Labour prime minister and Democrat president – when Harold Wilson rejected pressure from Lyndon B Johnson to send British troops to Vietnam.

Mr Wilson became prime minister in 1964, just two months after LBJ sent US troops. His first overseas trip was to the White House, in December 1964, and the PM returned to tell his cabinet: “Lyndon Johnson is begging me even to send a bagpipe band to Vietnam.”

Thatcher and Reagan

Thatcher at Reagan's 83rd birthday celebrations. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Thatcher at Reagan’s 83rd birthday celebrations. Pic: Reuters

And even though Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were ideological soulmates, Thatcher was furious when she wasn’t consulted before the Americans invaded Grenada in 1983 to topple a Marxist regime.

Even worse, according to Mrs Thatcher allies, a year earlier, Reagan had stayed neutral during the Falklands war. Reagan said he couldn’t understand why two US allies were arguing over “that little ice-cold bunch of land down there”.

Thatcher and Reagan became firm friends. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Thatcher and Reagan became firm friends. Pic: Reuters

But their relationship didn’t just survive, it flourished, including at one memorable visit to the presidential retreat at Camp David in 1984, where President Reagan famously drove Mrs T around in a golf buggy.

They would also memorably dance together at White House balls.

Blair and Bush

Blair hosts Bush in Durham in 2003. Pic: PA
Image:
Blair hosts Bush in Durham in 2003. Pic: PA

Camp David was also where in 2001 the Republican president George W Bush and Labour’s Sir Tony Blair embarked on the defining mission of his premiership: the Iraq War. It was to prove to be an historic encounter.

The war was the turning point of Sir Tony’s decade in Number 10. He was branded a liar over claims about Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction”, he was vilified by the Labour left, and it was the beginning of the end for him.

And to add to the suspicion among Sir Tony’s critics that he was Mr Bush’s poodle, in 2006 at a G8 summit in St Petersburg – that wouldn’t happen now – a rogue microphone picked up the president calling, “Yo, Blair! How are you doing?”

Cameron and Obama

Cameron and Obama serve food at a barbecue in the garden of 10 Downing Street. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Cameron and Obama serve food at a barbecue in the garden of 10 Downing Street. Pic: Reuters

Some years later, the Tory prime minister sometimes called the “heir to Blair”, David Cameron, bonded over burgers with the Democrat president Barack Obama, serving a BBQ lunch to military families in the Downing Street garden. They also played golf at the exclusive Grove resort in 2016.

They seemed unlikely allies: Obama, the first African-American president, and Cameron, the 19th old Etonian prime minister. It was claimed they had a “transatlantic bromance” in office. “Yes, he sometimes calls me bro,” Lord Cameron admitted.

But not everything went well.

The Tory PM persuaded Mr Obama to help the Remain campaign in the 2016 Brexit referendum, when he claimed the UK would be “at the back of the queue” on trade deals with the US, if it left the EU. It backfired, of course.

Now it’s Sir Keir Starmer’s turn to tread a delicate and potentially hazardous political tightrope as he entertains the latest – and most unconventional – US president.

The greatest dangers for Sir Keir will be a news conference in the afternoon, in the gardens, if the weather permits.

Good luck, as they say, with that.

Before then, there’s the potential for what the Americans call a “pool spray”, one of those impromptu, rambling and unpredictable Q&As we’ve seen so many times in the Oval Office.

For Sir Keir, what could possibly go wrong?

Chequers ’25 could be memorable and notable, like so many previous meetings between a PM and a president. But not necessarily for the right reasons for this UK prime minister.

Continue Reading

Trending