Hard to see how Rishi Sunak’s first King’s Speech won’t be his last

Published

1 year ago

November 7, 2023

admin

The King’s Speech is supposed to be the landmark moment in the life of parliament.

It is the occasion for a prime minister to set down his or her mission for government, and outline the laws they will pass to try to achieve their goals.

But this year, the moment will belong to King Charles III, rather than Rishi Sunak, for two reasons.

Politics live: Are ministers playing politics with their outrage over Gaza protests?

First is the sheer symbolism of the new monarch delivering the first King’s Speech in over seven decades.

An epoch-making moment, it reminds us all in the most formal of settings, laced with symbolism, that we have passed from the Elizabethan era to the new Carolean age.

Second is the reality of Mr Sunak’s predicament.

His first King’s Speech in power will be less about landing a vision and more about holding position, for this is a prime minister running out of time and with little space to push through new ideas.

Running out of time because very little can be done between now and an election when it comes to enacting new laws.

And even if Mr Sunak can get legislation onto the statute book, there isn’t time for that to make a material difference to voters before a general election.

He is also a prime minister constrained by a resistive rump in his party who he is not willing to take on.

Running out of ideas, because what we expect to see in the King’s Speech is hardly a grand plan for government.

Mr Sunak is instead going for a combination of new laws to create dividing lines with Labour ahead of the election (including annual oil and gas licensing, and strike laws), seeing through policies being worked up by predecessors (such as leasehold reform) and the odd Sunak initiative (banning tobacco sales for anyone born on or after January 2009 and longer jail sentences of violent offenders).

Talk to his team and they frame the King’s Speech as a “continuation” of what the prime minister has sought to put in place from the summer onwards – his tilt at long-term decision making as they put it, rather than a “wow moment”.

One senior insider said: “The King’s Speech isn’t a conference speech or an Autumn Statement. There isn’t a new shiny policy.

“It’s not going to be a wow moment, but it’s a continuation of travel of where we have been going and delivering, rather than focusing on polls day to day and week to week.”

Instead, Number 10 argues that the programme for government backs up the prime minister’s commitment to long-term decision-making; through growing the economy – be that energy security, regulatory frameworks for tech; strengthening society with legislation on smoking, reform on leaseholds and dealing with antisocial behaviour; more action on crime and safety and focusing on our national interest, be that around climate change, artificial Intelligence or security.

But some colleagues believe the sum of parts in this speech doesn’t add up to much and certainly not a cogent vision for a country losing patience with the Conservatives.

“There’s not much in here on cost of living,” says one senior colleague who laments that Mr Sunak didn’t do more on housing – planning and green belt reform – ahead of the general election to show voters he really is a candidate for change.

“It would have been bold, but it got shoved in the too-hard-to-do box,” said the former senior minister. “A load of colleagues – 50 even 70 – would be against it, but when you have Labour and Starmer nimby bashing, you’d have got it through with Labour votes and send a message to under 40s that we are serious about helping them.”

And there are pockets of Mr Sunak’s backbenches, MPs looking to Canadian Tory leader Pierre Poilierve as inspiration, noting that his decision to turn the Conservatives into the party of housebuilding has revived the centre right’s fortunes and brought younger voters.

But Mr Sunak does have his eye on an election in a different way, as he uses the King’s Speech to try to lay traps for Labour, to draw dividing lines between the government and the opposition over thorny issues that have the potential to ignite in voters’ minds – be it around net zero and environmental policies (think the row over ultra-low emission zones) or strikes.

On the former, the government will legislate for annual North Sea oil and gas licensing rounds to highlight the PM’s “pragmatic, proportionate and realistic” approach to net zero, in contrast to Labour, which has said it will honour existing licenses but has ruled out granting new ones.

The PM will also introduce new strike laws to protect public services over Christmas, with minimum service regulations for rail workers, ambulance staff and border security staff.

Number 10 figures believe these dividing lines showcase Mr Sunak’s values while also putting Labour on the spot about theirs.

But Labour insiders tell me they are “not worried” about the attacks.

“If they want to talk about their track record on energy bills and strikes, we’d be very happy,” says one figure close to Sir Keir Starmer.

Another senior party figure said this approach just showed how out of touch the Tory party is.

“Finding dividing lines for us? Do they seriously think that is how voters want to see the government run the country?

“Sunak’s meant to be the change? Where’s the change? Where are the answers to the big challenges facing the country on the cost of living and the NHS. It’s just more of the same. It doesn’t deal with the things voters care about.”

Even as Westminster chews over the content of the speech, while taking in the spectacle, I suspect the country has tuned out.

Because in the political backdrop to Tuesday’s pageantry, the problems are piling up for the prime minister.

It is the grisly details of the COVID inquiry revealing a government that was woefully unprepared and ill-equipped to tackle the pandemic at a moment of national crisis.

There are serious questions being raised as to whether the Conservative Party failed to act on rape allegations surrounding an MP and instead paid for an alleged victim to receive treatment in a private hospital.

The prime minister said on Monday that the allegations were “very serious” as he urged anyone with evidence of criminal acts to talk to the police.

There is the Daily Mail’s serialisation of former cabinet minister Nadine Dorries’s book on the downfall of Boris Johnson again throwing into sharp relief party infighting, while disquiet grows among some MPs about the home secretary’s provocative language, be it around protest marches or the homeless.

All of it has turned the public off, say some Conservative MPs, who fear that, whatever Mr Sunak does now, he won’t be able to get voters to tune back in.

This is his first King’s Speech – and it’s hard at the moment to see how it won’t end up his last.

UK

Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault

Published

10 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Russell Brand has been charged with rape and two counts of sexual assault between 1999 and 2005.

The Metropolitan Police say the 50-year-old comedian, actor and author has also been charged with one count of oral rape and one count of indecent assault.

The charges relate to four women.

He is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday 2 May.

Police have said Brand is accused of raping a woman in the Bournemouth area in 1999 and indecently assaulting a woman in the Westminster area of London in 2001.

He is also accused of orally raping and sexually assaulting a woman in Westminster in 2004.

The fourth charge alleges that a woman was sexually assaulted in Westminster between 2004 and 2005.

Police began investigating Brand, from Oxfordshire, in September 2023 after receiving a number of allegations.

The comedian has previously denied the accusations, and said all his sexual relationships were “absolutely always consensual”.

Met Police Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy, who is leading the investigation, said: “The women who have made reports continue to receive support from specially trained officers.

“The Met’s investigation remains open and detectives ask anyone who has been affected by this case, or anyone who has any information, to come forward and speak with police.”

UK

Last UK blast furnaces days from closure as Chinese owners cut off crucial supplies

Published

17 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Last UK blast furnaces days from closure as Chinese owners cut off crucial supplies

The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.

Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.

The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.

The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.

The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.

The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.

The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.

However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.

Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.

However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.

They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.

The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.

Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.

“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”

British Steel declined to comment.

UK

Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Published

20 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew's Pitch@Palace branded 'crude attempt to enrich himself' as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.

Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.

In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.

Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).

Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.

So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?

In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.

The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.

Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.

Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.

But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.

Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.

He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…

“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.

Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.

He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.

He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.

“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”

We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.

With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.