Sir Keir Starmer is under growing pressure to call for a ceasefire in Gaza after a string of senior Labour figures broke ranks to challenge his stance.
London mayor Sadiq Khan, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar and Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham are among those who want the Labour leadership to strengthen its position and back a full cessation of violence between Israel and Hamas.
Sir Keir is united with Rishi Sunak, the US, and most recently the EU in pushing for “humanitarian pauses” in the fighting, while supporting Israel’s right to defend itself against the militants who launched a wave of bloodshed in the country earlier this month, killing more than 1,400 people, according to authorities.
But the Labour leader has angered MPs for not going further, with dozens urging him to back a ceasefire to prevent the conflict from escalating.
On Friday Mr Khan, who became the first-ever Muslim mayor of London in 2016, said: “I join the international community in calling for a ceasefire. It would stop the killing and would allow vital aid supplies to reach those who need it in Gaza.
“It would also allow the international community more time to prevent a protracted conflict in the region and further devastating loss of life.”
Mr Khan said Israel did have the right to defend itself, but warned the “terrible situation in Gaza now looks set to deteriorate even further”.
“A widespread military escalation will only deepen the humanitarian disaster. It will increase human suffering on all sides. No nation, including Israel, has the right to break international law.”
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
Scottish Labour leader Mr Sarwar, who in 2021 became the UK’s first Muslim to lead a political party, made the same demand with his own video just a few hours later.
He said there must be an “immediate cessation of violence, with an end of rocket fire into and out of Gaza”, so that aid can be delivered and hostages released.
“Let me be clear, that means a ceasefire right now,” he said.
Shortly afterwards Mr Burnham, deputy mayor Kate Green and the 10 leaders of Greater Manchester released a joint statement also calling for a ceasefire “amid the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Gaza”.
The group said they “condemn unreservedly” the Hamas attacks on 7 October and that Israel “has the right to take targeted action within international law to defend itself”.
But they added: “We also have profound concerns about the loss of thousands of innocent lives in Gaza, the displacement of many more and widespread suffering through the ongoing blockade of essential goods and services.
“It is vital that urgent support and humanitarian aid is allowed into the area.”
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
Shadow environment secretary Steve Reed had earlier said he “empathises” with MPs angry about the party leadership’s stance on the crisis in Gaza, but stood by the position taken by Sir Keir.
The shadow frontbench member told Sky News that if the attack Israel suffered had happened in the UK: “Our state would have sought to defend ourselves to protect our citizens by dismantling the capability of a terrorist organisation that carried it out. That applies to Israel too, they have the right under international law to do that.”
Party sources also made clear Sir Keir was not about to strengthen his position.
Tensions have been growing not only over his resistance in calling for a ceasefire, but also over his previous remarks in which he appeared to suggest Israel had the right to cut off power and water in Gaza.
The comments, which he has since rowed back from, prompted resignations among Labour councillors and angered the party’s MPs, even those on the frontbenches as shadow ministers.
Sir Keir has been holding meetings within his party to soothe some of the anger, including in talks with Muslim Labour MPs in parliament on Wednesday. They urged him during the “firm” exchange to back a ceasefire, believing the British public support the move as well.
“Let me be clear: that means a ceasefire right now.”
Anas Sarwar is determined to offer no room for equivocation or confusion on his position on the question which has cut a bitter rift through the Labour party this week.
The Scottish Labour leader has chosen the words of his social media video carefully – insisting that while “throughout this conflict I have utterly condemned the actions of Hamas” there is “no justification for the collective punishment of the people of Gaza”.
He goes on to argue that withholding essential supplies to Palestinian civilians is a “breach” of international law and that a ceasefire is the only way to ensure humanitarian aid gets through.
His intervention follows a widespread mutiny from Labour councillors and growing discontent on the parliamentary benches on the issue – sparked originally by anger in response to Sir Keir Starmer’s interview with LBC in which he suggested Israel “does have that right” to cut off power and water from Gaza as part of its action to defend itself within the context of international law.
The party leadership has been fighting a rear-guard action to backtrack on the interview ever since, arguing Sir Keir has been misinterpreted and was inadvertently responding to a different question.
But the row is a symptom of a wider feeling of frustration that the party’s position on the conflict is out of step with the position of much of its membership in not doing enough to stand up for the rights of the people of Gaza – an anger which only grows as the casualties mount and the humanitarian situation becomes ever more desperate.
Anas Sarwar’s announcement comes just hours after a similar call from London’s mayor Sadiq Khan, who argues the situation in Gaza is deteriorating, military action appears imminent – and therefore the time to make the case for a ceasefire is now.
This afternoon Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, added his weight to the campaign too. Burnham’s never been afraid to speak his mind or diverge from the leader’s position, but he’s a powerful voice in the party.
Likewise Mr Khan is no stranger to taking an independent stance – as seen during this summer’s row over Ulez expansion – but Sarwar’s intervention is perhaps more striking.
He’s something of a rising star in the party thanks to Labour’s growing popularity in the Scottish polls, crowned by their stonking win over the SNP in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election.
The road to a majority Labour victory at the next general election has to run through Scotland; and while the recent collapse in SNP support is largely due to their own internal issues, Sarwar has successfully capitalised on that. His influence has grown as a result.
The SNP have been calling for a ceasefire for some time now – Humza Yousaf’s wife’s family of course among those trapped in Gaza.
Now Sarwar’s position is more closely aligned with that of the SNP than his own party leadership, which mirrors the government’s in calling for ‘humanitarian pauses’ to let aid in and civilians and hostages out without negating Israel’s right to take military action against Hamas.
For two of Labour’s most prominent Muslim voices to step beyond the party line in calling for a ceasefire piles the pressure on to Sir Keir Starmer.
The Labour leader has spent years stamping out antisemitism in the party and so far has been resolutely determined not to suggest any lessening in his unequivocal support for Israel as it responds to the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas.
But as the carnage in Gaza grows worse by the hour – how long can his position hold?
Ministers also resist ceasefire pressure
Government ministers are also resisting pressure to back calls for a ceasefire.
On Friday, dozens of children laid teddy bears outside the gates of the Foreign Office to put pressure on Downing Street to withdraw military support for Israel.
The demonstration was organised by a group of parents who said they felt compelled to act as they watched the scenes of destruction in the bombarded 25-mile territory. The Palestinian death toll in Israeli retaliatory strikes in Gaza has passed 7,000, according to the health ministry.
However, Education Secretary Gillian Keegan said on Friday morning that Downing Street did not want to “cross that line of telling Israel it has anything but the right to defend itself”.
“Hamas have created this situation and Hamas are now embedding themselves in the Palestinian population,” she told ITV’s Good Morning Britain.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Image: Parents and children lay out cuddly toys across the entrance to the Foreign Office in London
Instead of a ceasefire, government ministers are calling for a break in the fighting – dubbing this a “humanitarian pause”- in order to get aid into Gaza and allow British citizens to escape.
Around 200 British nationals are thought to be trapped in the territory.
UK Border Force teams are set up in Egypt to help if the Rafah border crossing is opened up for people to leave.
The crossing into northeast Egypt is currently closed apart from for aid deliveries – with Cairo reportedly blaming Israeli bombings around the area for it not being open for foreign nationals to pass through.
Opinion by: Fraser Edwards, co-founder and CEO, Cheqd
Brutal honesty has its place, especially when confronting discomfort, so here’s one that can’t be sweetened with honey: 96% of imported honey in the UK is fake! Tests found that 24 of 25 jars were suspicious or didn’t meet regulatory standards.
Self-sovereign identity (SSI) can fix this.
The UK Food Standards Agency and the European Commission both urge reform to tackle this concern by creating a robust traceability database within supply chain networks to ensure consumer transparency and trust. Data, however, is not the problem. The issue is people tampering with it.
This is not the first time products have been revealed to be inauthentic, with the Honey Authenticity Network highlighting that one-third of all honey products were fake in 2020, a fraudulent industry amounting to 3.4 billion euros ($3.65 million) of counterfeit goods entering the EU in 2023, as reported by the European Commission.
What is EMA, and how does it affect honey?
Economically motivated adulteration (EMA) involves intentionally substituting valuable ingredients for less expensive products such as sweeteners or low-quality oil. This practice leads to severe economic and health complications — and, in some cases, disease — due to the poisonous additives from substitute products.
The adulteration often involves creating an ultra-diluted blend containing minimal nutritional value, and counterfeiters call it… honey.
Fraudsters dilute the product with high fructose corn syrup or increase the thickness with starch or gelatine. These adulterants closely mimic honey’s chemical profile, making it extremely difficult to detect with traditional tests such as isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Fake honey lacks the essential enzymes that give real honey its flavor and nutrients. To make matters worse, honey’s characteristics vary based on nectar sources, the harvest season, geography and more.
Some companies filter out pollen content, a key identifier of a honey’s geographical origin, before exporting it to intermediary countries like Vietnam or India to further obfuscate the process. Once this is done, the products are brought to supermarket shelves and labeled with false certifications to command higher prices. This tactic exploits the fact that many regulatory bodies lack the means to verify every shipment.
The hidden cost of food fraud
The supply chain is profoundly fractured, as a jar of honey passes six to eight key points in the supply chain before it arrives on the shelves in the UK. Current practices make authenticity verification extremely difficult. Coupled with the inefficient paper-based bureaucracy that makes it hard to track origin obscuration attempts in intermediary countries, we cannot reliably determine the true extent of food fraud.
One Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimate suggests that at least 1% of the global food industry, potentially up to $40 billion per year, is affected — and it could be even higher.
Fraudulent practices don’t just harm consumers — they destroy beekeepers’ livelihoods, flooding the market and destroying profitability for legitimate traders. Ziya Sahin, a Turkish beekeeper, explained the frustration with food fraud regulation:
“Our beekeepers are angry, and they ask why we’re not doing something to stop it. But we have no authority to inspect,” he said. “I’m not even allowed to ask street sellers whether their honey is real.”
While there’s a growing appetite for more reliable testing and stricter enforcement, solutions are lagging. The EU’s latest attempt to fix this? Digital product passports are designed to track honey’s origins and composition, but they are already being criticized as ineffective and easy to manipulate, ultimately leaving the door open for fraud to continue.
EU passports are an ineffective solution
The European Union’s Digital Product Passport aims to tackle this by enhancing traceability and transparency in its supply chains. By 2030, all goods in the EU must have a digital product passport containing detailed information on the product’s lifecycle, origins and environmental effects.
While the idea sounds promising, it fails to recognize the extent to which fraudsters can forge certificates and obscure origins by passing products through intermediary countries alongside officials who turn a blind eye.
At the core of this issue is trust. Despite history showing that these rules can and will be bent, we rely on governments to implement laws and regulations. Technology, on the other hand, is agnostic and doesn’t care about money or incentives.
This is the fundamental flaw of the EU’s approach — a system built on human oversight that is vulnerable to the corruption these supply chains are already known for.
Self-sovereign identity (SSI) for products
Many people are already aware of the scalability trilemma, but the trust triangle is a key concept in SSI that defines how trust is established between issuers, holders and verifiers. It makes fraud much more challenging because every product must be backed by a verifiable credential from a trusted source to prove it’s real.
Issuers, like manufacturers or certification bodies, create and sign verifiable credentials that attest to a product’s authenticity. The holder, typically the product owner, stores and presents these credentials when required. Verifiers — such as retailers, customs officials or consumers — can check the credentials’ validity without relying on a central authority.
Verifiable credentials are protected by cryptography. If someone tries to sell fake products, their missing or invalid credentials will immediately reveal the fraud.
Government reforms must extend beyond current regulatory oversight and explore the approach outlined in the trust trilemma to safeguard supply chains from widespread adulteration and fraud.
SSI provides the underlying infrastructure necessary to reliably track the identity of products across multiple bodies, standards and regions. By enabling tamper-proof, end-to-end traceability in every single product — whether a jar of honey or a designer handbag — SSI ensures sufficient validators confirm the data is correct to tackle fraud and obfuscation attempts.
SSI also empowers consumers to independently verify products without relying on third-party databases. Buyers can scan the product to authenticate its origin and history directly via the cryptographic certifications confirmed by the validators to further reduce the risk of misinformation even if it reaches the shelves. This would also help reduce corruption and inefficiencies, as many checks are made on paper, which can be easily altered and is a slow process.
As honey fraud methods continue to expand, so do these products’ harm to consumers and local businesses. Steps taken to tackle these methods must thus also broaden. The EU’s Digital Product Passports aim to improve traceability; but unfortunately, they fall short of fraudsters’ sophistication. Implementation of SSI is a necessary step to effectively address the extent fraudsters take to ensure their product arrives on shelves.
Opinion by: Fraser Edwards, co-founder and CEO, Cheqd.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
The environment secretary has defended the government’s net zero agenda after Sir Tony Blair said phasing out fossil fuels was “doomed to fail”.
The former prime minister said the approach to transitioning to a green economy wasn’t “working” and was “inadequate” in a report published yesterday by the Tony Blair Institute.
But speaking to Sky News’ Wilfred Frost on Breakfast, Steve Reed said the government was “moving away from sticking plaster solutions towards doing what’s right for the future of the economy, and for the future of households”.
He said transitioning to a green economy was necessary for the UK to take back “control of our own energy supply” especially in light of Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
In his foreword to the report, Sir Tony called the whole strategy of transitioning to a green economy “unrealistic”.
“Present policy solutions are inadequate and, worse, are distorting the debate into a quest for a climate platform that is unrealistic and therefore unworkable,” he wrote.
More on Environment
Related Topics:
“Too often, political leaders fear saying what many know to be true: the current approach isn’t working.”
Asked whether he believed Sir Tony was right to say the focus shouldn’t be on using less fossil fuels but on using methods such as carbon capture, Mr Reed conceded that “we’ll still be using fossil fuels… for some time to come”.
He added: “For many decades to come. The transition is so, so transition isn’t gonna happen overnight.”
Shadow environment secretary Victoria Atkins told Sky News that Sir Tony’s message should prompt a “rethink” in government.
“If even Tony Blair doesn’t agree with the Labour government, then that is quite a clear message. I would imagine to them that they have got to rethink this.”
PayPal says the US Securities and Exchange Commission has abandoned its investigation into the payment giant’s US-dollar stablecoin.
PayPal said in an April 29 regulatory filing that the SEC concluded its investigation into PayPal USD (PYUSD) and wouldn’t be taking any action.
The company said it received a subpoena from the SEC’s Division of Enforcement over its stablecoin in November 2023.
“The subpoena requests the production of documents. We are cooperating with the SEC in connection with this request,” PayPal stated at the time.
In its latest filing, the firm said the SEC notified it in February that the agency “was closing this inquiry without enforcement action.”
PayPal has said its stablecoin is 100% redeemable for US dollars and “fully backed” by dollar deposits, including short-term treasuries and cash equivalents.
However, the stablecoin has struggled to gain momentum in a crowded market dominated by rivals Tether and Circle. PYUSD has a market capitalization of just $880 million, less than 1% of Tether’s (USDT) $148.5 billion.
PayPal’s stablecoin has seen better growth this year with a 75% increase in PYUSD circulating supply since the beginning of 2025, according to CoinGecko. It remains down 14% from its peak supply of just over $1 billion in August 2024.
That growth could be bolstered by a company announcement on April 23 introducing rewards for PYUSD in a new loyalty offering that will enable US users to earn 3.7% annually for holding the asset on the platform.
Meanwhile, on April 24, PayPal announced a partnership with Coinbase to increase the adoption of PYUSD.
“We are excited to drive new, exciting, and innovative use cases together with Coinbase and the entire cryptocurrency community, putting PYUSD at the center,” said Alex Chriss, PayPal President and CEO.
The payments giant also reported robust first-quarter earnings and the completion of significant share repurchase activities.
The firm beat Wall Street estimates, earning $1.33 per share in the first quarter, topping analyst expectations of $1.16. Revenue rose 1% from a year before to $7.8 billion.