Connect with us

Published

on

Rishi Sunak has described a planned pro-Palestinian march in London on Armistice Day as “disrespectful” – but has accepted the protest will go ahead.

The prime minister met with the chief of the Metropolitan Police Sir Mark Rowley for a crisis meeting this afternoon – and had vowed to hold him “accountable” for the commissioner’s decision to greenlight the demonstration on 11 November.

Sir Mark had resisted calls to try and block a march taking place – and said, after looking at intelligence, the legal threshold for a ban had not been met.

Israel-Gaza latest: ‘Hamas head of weapons killed’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM: Met Police chief ‘accountable’ over protest

In a statement, the prime minister said: “Freedom is the right to peacefully protest. And the test of that freedom is whether our commitment to it can survive the discomfort and frustration of those who seek to use it, even if we disagree with them. We will meet that test and remain true to our principles.”

He added: “It’s welcome that the police have confirmed that the march will be away from the Cenotaph and they will ensure that the timings do not conflict with any remembrance events.

“There remains the risk of those who seek to divide society using this weekend as a platform to do so. That is what I discussed with the Metropolitan Police Commissioner in our meeting.

“The commissioner has committed to keep the Met Police’s posture under constant review based on the latest intelligence about the nature of the protests.”

Read more:
Labour shadow minister resigns over Starmer’s Gaza position
Explained: Can you ban a protest?

Sir Mark Rowley has interpreted the law correctly

By Graham Wettone, policing analyst

Sir Mark Rowley was very careful with his words about why the pro-Palestinian protest this Saturday has not been banned.

He spoke about the legal issues around banning a gathering and then explained the possible options for a ban.

He has interpreted the law correctly and some in government appear to have misunderstood or misinterpreted it, and forgotten the police have operational independence.

Section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986 allows for marches and processions to have conditions placed on them if the senior officer “reasonably believes” it may result in serious disorder, damage or disruption.

The Met can impose conditions relating to the duration and route of a march, as placing a number restriction is totally unworkable. That is what they will be doing with the organisers this Saturday, as the organising groups have refused to cancel the protest.

Section 13 of the Public Order Act relates to banning a march. This is only applicable if the commissioner reasonably believes that the powers under Section 12 – any conditions he imposes on the procession – will not be sufficient to prevent serious disorder.

Sir Mark clearly stated that, at the moment, the intelligence does not support the “reasonable belief” that serious disorder is likely, hence he cannot legally apply for a ban under Section 13. I would agree that is probably the case – but intelligence will be developing over the next few days, and the commissioner did not rule out the situation may change before Saturday.

Sir Mark then explained the law around gatherings or assemblies. Police can impose conditions on these under Section 14 of Public Order Act, which is similar to Section 12 in that there needs to be a “reasonable belief” of “serious disorder”.

However a key difference is that Section 13 only applies to processions or marches under Section 12 – and not gatherings under Section 14. There are no legal powers to ban people gathering.

The Met tried to prevent unlawful assemblies using Section 14 across London a few years ago with Just Stop Oil, but the High Court ruled it was unlawful and that gatherings cannot be legally banned.

The likely scenario as it stands is that if a ban went in for the march, the organising groups would still have people attend a “gathering” – and the fact a ban is in place may well increase numbers. If groups then decide to separate off in different directions, and if there are significant numbers in the thousands, then arresting all is impossible.

PM ‘picking a fight with police’

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer had accused Mr Sunak of “cowardice” for “picking a fight” with the police.

He tweeted: “Remembrance events must be respected. Full stop.

“But the person the PM needs to hold accountable is his home secretary. Picking a fight with the police instead of working with them is cowardice.”

Home Secretary Suella Braverman had called the pro-Palestinian demonstrations “hate marches” and said anyone who vandalised the Cenotaph on Armistice Day “must be put into a jail cell faster than their feet can touch the ground”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM ‘politicking’ over pro-Palestine march

No 10 denies putting pressure on Met

Downing Street denied seeking to put pressure on the Met, which is operationally independent, and insisted the meeting was about “seeking assurances” that their approach is “robust”.

The Met has said its officers were already preparing for remembrance events over the weekend and “we will do everything in our power to ensure that people who want to mark the occasion can do so safely and without disruption.”

In a statement on Tuesday, Sir Mark said: “The laws created by Parliament are clear. There is no absolute power to ban protest, therefore there will be a protest this weekend.”

He added that the use of the power to block moving protests is “incredibly rare” and must be reserved for cases where there is intelligence to suggest a “real threat” of serious disorder.

He said organisers of Saturday’s rally have shown “complete willingness to stay away from the Cenotaph and Whitehall and have no intention of disrupting the nation’s remembrance events”.

“Should this change, we’ve been clear we will use powers and conditions available to us to protect locations and events of national importance at all costs.”

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Organisers say protest will be ‘well away’ from Cenotaph

Tens of thousands have demonstrated in London in recent weeks over Palestinian deaths in the Israel-Hamas war, with 29 arrested during a fourth week of protests last Saturday, during which fireworks were thrown.

Organisers of the protest next Saturday say it will be “well away” from the Cenotaph – going from Hyde Park, around a mile from the war memorial in Whitehall, to the US embassy – and won’t start until after the 11am silence.

The Met chief will likely come under further pressure to change his mind in the coming days, with Cabinet ministers stressing discussions are ongoing.

Health Secretary Steve Barclay told Sky News that 11 November was the “wrong day” for protest action in London and “there’ll be ongoing discussions on this”.

He said: “There is a legal threshold and the Commissioner is of the view that that legal threshold has not been met.

“Obviously, the Home Office and colleagues will discuss that over the course of the day.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Resident doctors in England consider whether new offer is enough to call off five-day strike in run-up to Christmas

Published

on

By

Resident doctors in England consider whether new offer is enough to call off five-day strike in run-up to Christmas

Doctors in England planning to go on strike in the run-up to Christmas are considering a new offer from the government to end the long-running dispute.

Resident doctors, formerly junior doctors, will walk out from 7am on 17 December until 7am on 22 December.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting has appealed to doctors to accept the government’s latest package.

The British Medical Association (BMA) said it will consult members by surveying them online on whether or not the deal from the government is enough to call off next week’s walkout.

The poll will close on Monday – just two days before the five-day strike is set to start.

The number of people in hospital with flu in England is at a record level for this time of year. File pic: PA
Image:
The number of people in hospital with flu in England is at a record level for this time of year. File pic: PA

The union said the new offer includes new legislation to ensure UK medical graduates are prioritised for speciality training roles.

It also includes an increase in the number of speciality training posts over the next three years – from 1,000 to 4,000 – with more to start in 2026.

Funding for mandatory Royal College examination and membership fees for resident doctors is also part of the deal.

It does not address resident doctors’ demand for a 26% salary rise over the next few years to make up for the erosion in their pay in real terms since 2008 – this is on top of a 28.9% increase they have had over the last three years.

Mr Streeting warned a resident doctors’ strike over Christmas would have a “much different degree of risk” than previous walkouts.

It coincides with pressures facing the NHS, with health chiefs raising concerns over a “tidal wave” of illness and a “very nasty strain of flu”.

A new strain of the flu virus is thought to be much more infectious than previous strains and has already led to a record number of patients needing urgent hospital care.

The union’s mandate to strike is set to expire shortly, but Mr Streeting has offered to extend it to allow the medics to take action later in January if they reject his offer.

He called the union’s decision not to take it up “inexplicable”.

Last week, NHS England chief executive Sir Jim Mackey branded the decision by doctors to strike as “something that feels cruel” and which is “calculated to cause mayhem at a time when the service is really pulling all the stops out to try and avoid that and keep people safe”.

Read more from Sky News:
US accused of ‘piracy’
Flights diverted in Moscow

BMA resident doctors committee chair Dr Jack Fletcher said the latest government offer “is the result of thousands of resident doctors showing that they are prepared to stand up for their profession and its future”.

“It should not have taken strike action, but make no mistake: it was strike action that got us this far,” he said.

“We have forced the government to recognise the scale of the problems and to respond with measures on training numbers and prioritisation.

“However, this offer does not increase the overall number of doctors working in England and does nothing to restore pay for doctors, which remains well within the government’s power to do.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Poland resubmits vetoed crypto bill with ‘not even a comma’ changed

Published

on

By

Poland resubmits vetoed crypto bill with ‘not even a comma’ changed

Polish lawmakers have doubled down on crypto regulation rejected by President Karol Nawrocki, deepening tensions between the president and Prime Minister Donald Tusk.

Polska2050, part of the ruling coalition in the Sejm — Poland’s lower house of parliament — reintroduced the extensive crypto bill on Tuesday, just days after Nawrocki vetoed an identical bill.

The bill’s backers, including Adam Gomoła — a member of Poland2050 — called Bill 2050 an “improved” successor to the vetoed Bill 1424, but government spokesman Adam Szłapka reportedly declared that “not even a comma” had been changed.

The division over Poland’s crypto bill comes amid the rollout of the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) across member states ahead of a July 2026 compliance deadline for EU crypto businesses.

Critics say Bill 2050 is “exactly same bill”

The new version of Poland’s draft crypto bill provides an 84-page-long document that essentially replicates the original Bill 1424, aiming to designate the Polish Financial Supervision Authority as the country’s primary crypto asset market regulator.

Crypto advocates like Polish politician Tomasz Mentzen previously criticized Bill 1424 as “118 pages of overregulation,” particularly in comparison to shorter versions in other EU member states like Hungary or Romania.

“The government has once again adopted exactly the same bill on cryptoassets,” Mentzen wrote in an X post on Tuesday.

Source: Tomasz Mentzen

He also mocked Tusk’s claim that the president’s earlier veto was tied to the alleged involvement of the “Russian mafia,” saying: “The bill is perfect, and anyone who thinks otherwise is funded by Putin.”

Government spokesman Szłapka reportedly claimed that Nawrocki will likely not veto the proposed bill this time, following a classified security briefing in parliament last week and “now has full knowledge” of the implications on national security.

The issue with MiCA: Local versus centralized EU oversight

Poland’s debate over its crypto bill sets an important precedent for implementing the EU-wide MiCA regulation, as the proposed legislation would place responsibility for market supervision on the local financial regulator.

The issue is particularly significant amid calls from some member states for more centralized MiCA supervision under the Paris-based European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).