Rishi Sunak has been urged to sack Suella Braverman after she accused the Metropolitan Police of “playing favourites” with how it handles controversial protests.
The home secretary once again described pro-Palestinian protesters as “hate marchers” and added: “I do not believe that these marches are merely a cry for help for Gaza.
“They are an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland.
“Also, disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
In a rebuke to the Metropolitan Police, which is allowing a pro-Palestine march to go ahead on Armistice Day, Ms Braverman said the force was guilty of “double standards” by taking a more lenient approach to left-wing demonstrations than right-wing ones.
She also repeated her claim that the pro-Palestine marches that have been taking place across the UK were “hate marches” similar to those seen in Northern Ireland – comments that were branded “wholly offensive and ignorant”.
More on Israel-hamas War
Related Topics:
Labour’s shadow business secretary Jonathan Reynolds branded Ms Braverman “out of control” and told Sky News Mr Sunak should “of course” sack her if he had not signed off on the article.
“Where is the prime minister on this?” he asked. “Do we believe the prime minister signed off that kind of inflammatory rhetoric? He won’t tell us.
“If you have a home secretary that is so out of control, so divisive, so inflammatory, undermining the police and, therefore, the national security and safety of the public, that’s not someone who should be home secretary.”
Sky News has confirmed that Downing Street did not fully sign off the home secretary’s article. It is understood Number 10 were sent it and suggested changes that were not then carried out.
Labour was joined by the Liberal Democrats in calling on Mr Sunak to sack Ms Braverman, with party leader Sir Ed Davey accusing Ms Braverman of “putting police officers in harm’s way”.
“The home secretary’s irresponsible words and foul actions have significantly increased the likelihood of unrest this weekend and the risk of violence towards officers,” he said.
In an urgent question in the House of Commons, policing minister Chris Philp defended Ms Braverman and said it was “reasonable for politicians” to raise “concerns and make sure that the police are protecting those communities”.
He insisted the government “resolutely backs the question of operational independence”.
In the article, Ms Braverman wrote: “Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:04
Minister: ‘I would not describe them as hate marches’
“During COVID why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?
“Right-wing and nationalist protesters who engage in aggression are rightly met with a stern response yet pro-Palestinian mobs displaying almost identical behaviour are largely ignored, even when clearly breaking the law?”
In response, the Met Police said they would “not be commenting at this time”.
Earlier this week its commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, confirmed that the demonstration on Saturday would go ahead because the “legal threshold” to stop it on security grounds “had not been met”.
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.
Meanwhile, one former Tory cabinet minister told Sky’s political editor Beth Rigbythat Ms Braverman’s comments were “wholly offensive and ignorant of where people in Northern Ireland stand on the issues of Israel and Gaza”.
“It would be good to know what she knows about what Northern Ireland people think about the current Israel-Palestine situation before she casts aspersions,” they said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
8:35
Harper refuses to comment on Braverman
“It’s clear that the home secretary is only looking after her misguided aspirations for leader than responsible leadership as a home secretary.”
A senior Tory MP branded the home secretary an “embarrassment”.
“The Conservatives have always been a party of fundamental decency. This is either ignorantly whipping up division [bad enough] or it’s being done deliberately, which is just shameful. When a hotch-potch of thugs and hooligans choose to kick off on Saturday she can look to herself as an enabler.”
Another former Tory cabinet minister said while he agreed with Ms Braverman about the nature of the marches, “this would be a bad hill to die on”.
“I think Suella wants to lock down the right ahead of next year, but this would be a bad hill to die on,” they said.
“I don’t think Number 10 really disagree with her and she seems to be trying very hard to stir a needless fight with them.”
Pointing to potential difficulties Mr Sunak may face if he did sack Ms Braverman, the former cabinet minister said any action against her could mobilise supportive MPs to trigger a no confidence vote in his leadership.
Image: The route marchers plan to take on Armistice Day
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 this Saturday’s protest 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.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he is “exchangeable” for Ukrainian membership of NATO, indicating he would be prepared to step down as president if his country was allowed to join the military alliance.
He also suggested he was ready to sign a minerals deal with the US that was put on hold after his heated meeting with Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Friday.
Mr Zelenskyy was speaking to reporters on Sunday evening after earlier talks with other world leaders at a London summit hosted by Sir Keir Starmer, who suggested a coalition of European allies could step up to defend Ukraine and “guarantee the peace”.
Asked by Sky News’ lead world news presenter Yalda Hakim if he could quit in the event his country becomes a NATO member, he said: “I am exchangeable for NATO.”
The Ukraine president added: “I have said that I am exchanging for NATO membership, then it means I have fulfilled my mission. NATO means I have fulfilled my mission.”
But, he continued: “To change me, it will not be easy because it is not enough to simply hold elections. You would need to prevent me from participating. And it will be a bit more difficult.”
More on Volodymyr Zelenskyy
Related Topics:
Mr Zelenskyy has also rebuffed US officials calling for him to resign.
His comments at Stansted Airport come after Republicans including senator Lindsay Graham and speaker Mike Johnson suggested he should step down from his position following the fiery White House exchange with President Trump.
Mr Zelenskyy spoke to journalists shortly before leaving the UK on Sunday evening.
Image: Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaking to Sky News’ Yalda Hakim
In response to a question from Yalda Hakim, Mr Zelenskyy said: “I can give [Lindsay Graham] citizenship of Ukraine and he will become a citizen of our country.
“And then his voice will start to gain weight, and I will hear him as a citizen of Ukraine on the topic of who must be the president.”
“The president of Ukraine will have to be chosen not in Lindsay Graham’s home but in Ukraine,” he added.
Image: Pic: Reuters
Mr Zelenskyy confirmed there has been communication between Ukraine and the Trump administration since the clash on Friday, but “not on my level”.
Mr Graham – a Republican senator and close Trump ally – labelled the meeting a “complete, utter disaster” at a press briefing on Friday.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
10:47
Watch Trump and Zelenskyy clash
Asked whether Mr Zelenskyy should step aside, he said: “He either needs to resign or send somebody over that we can do business with, or he needs to change.”
After the London summit on Sunday, the prime minister unveiled a four-step plan discussed by leaders, including a pledge to “develop a coalition of the willing” to defend a deal in Ukraine and guarantee a peace settlement.
Sir Keir said Europe “must do the heavy lifting”, and the UK “is prepared to back this with boots on the ground and planes in the air, together with others”.
He also announced a new deal which will allow Ukraine to use £1.6bn of UK export finance to buy 5,000 more air defence missiles.
Zelenskyy’s meeting with the King
The Ukrainian president’s 90-minute sit down with the media came shortly after he wrapped up a tough week with a visit to see the King at Sandringham.
Mr Zelenskyy flew to Norfolk in a helicopter on Sunday afternoon after attending the security summit in central London.
Image: Pic: PA
People – some holding Ukraine flags – gathered outside Sandringham to try to witness his arrival. A military helicopter could be seen flying low before descending over the estate.
Pictures released after the meeting show Charles and Mr Zelenskyy shaking hands by the entrance to the royal home. The pair chatted briefly before heading inside, where they posed for more photographs.
Their meeting lasted just under an hour, Sky News understands.
Image: Pic: PA
A difficult week for Ukrainian president
Mr Zelenskyy’s difficult few days began on Friday, when his day at the White House with Mr Trump was cut short after their meeting in the Oval Office descended into a shouting match.
The pair had been due to sign a minerals deal and hold a joint press conference – but both events were called off after their tense exchange, fuelled in part by comments from vice president JD Vance.
Image: Sir Keir welcomed Mr Zelenskyy to Downing Street on Saturday. Pic: PA
As White House officials scrapped the day’s schedule, Mr Trump described the meeting as “very meaningful” in a post on his Truth Social platform.
He wrote: “I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations.”
Meanwhile, in an interview on Fox News, the Ukrainian president said the row was “not good for both sides” and refused to apologise. Mr Zelenskyy then jetted to the UK to meet Sir Keir and other world leaders.
Sir Keir Starmer has suggested a coalition of European allies could step up and defend a potential deal for Ukraine to “guarantee the peace”.
The prime minister indicated some EU nations could be prepared to increase defence spending to protect any peace deal that is agreed between Ukraine and Russia.
But speaking at summit of EU leaders in central London, Sir Keir acknowledged that no such coalition had yet been formed and that “not every nation will feel able to contribute”.
Instead, he said “those willing” – though he did not state which countries this included – would “intensify planning now with real urgency”.
In a sign this could mean troops from member states being sent to Ukraine, he added: “The UK is prepared to back this with boots on the ground and planes in the air, together with others. Europe must do the heavy lifting.”
The UK, France and Ukraine will work on a ceasefire plan to present to the United States, the prime minister has said, in the wake of Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s White House clash with Donald Trump.
Sir Keir Starmer, who visited Washington on Thursday, said he believes Mr Trump does want a “lasting peace” between Russia and Ukraine.
He also said Europe is in a “moment of real fragility” and he would not trust the word of Vladimir Putin.
Referring to the argument in the White House’s Oval Office on Thursday between Mr Trump, US vice president JD Vance and Ukrainian president Mr Zelenskyy, the PM said it made him feel “uncomfortable”.
“Nobody wants to see that,” he told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.
He added: “We have to find a way that we can all work together. Because, in the end, we’ve had three years of bloody conflict. Now, we need to get to that lasting peace.”
“Clearly, you know, there’s a lot of tension,” he said. “The cameras were on.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:42
When Starmer met Zelenskyy: What happened?
Later in the evening he phoned both Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy, saying his “driving purpose” is to “bridge this and get us back to the central focus”.
On Saturday, the PM said he had “quite a long time with President Zelenskyy” before speaking to Donald Trump and French president Emmanuel Macron on the phone.
“We’ve now agreed that the United Kingdom, along with France and possibly one or two others, will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting, and then we’ll discuss that plan with the United States,” he said.
Of Mr Trump, he said: “I am clear in my mind that he does want a lasting peace.”
Asked why that was, he said: “Because I’ve spoken to him a number of times. I’ve got to know him. I’ve had extensive discussions with him and I believe his motivation is lasting peace.”
He added: “If the central question you’re putting to me is do I trust Donald Trump when he says he wants lasting peace? The answer to that question is yes.”
The PM said he was still pushing for a US “backstop” on Ukrainian security, adding that it was the subject of “intense” discussion.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:40
Ukrainians react to Trump row
The “components of a lasting peace”, he said, include a “strong Ukraine to fight on, if necessary, to be in a position of strength”.
And he is pursuing a “European element to security guarantees”.
“That’s why I’ve been forward-leaning on this about what we would do – and a US backstop,” he said.
“That’s the package: all three parts need to be in place, and that’s what I’m working hard to bring together.”
Asked if he would trust Vladimir Putin, Sir Keir said: “Well, no, I wouldn’t trust Putin, which is why I want a security guarantee.
“I wouldn’t trust him not to come again, because he’s proven that he will come again. He’s already done it and we know what his ambitions are.”
Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said his party would support sending British troops to Ukraine as peacekeepers in the event that a “credible” deal is struck.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said European nations need to “make sure that America does not disengage”, adding: “If we all get dragged into an escalation, America will get dragged into it eventually.”
She described Volodymyr Zelenslyy as a “hero” and said her heart “went out to” him during the on-camera argument at the White House.
“I watched it and I couldn’t believe what was happening,” she said. “He was being humiliated.”
Such “difficult conversations” should not happen in front of the cameras, she added.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer greets Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni in Downing Street. Pic: Reuters
The UK is holding an international defence summit on Sunday, hosting the leaders of Italy, France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Canada, Finland and Romania.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni told Sir Keir Starmer it is “very, very important that we avoid the risk that the West divides” as she arrived for talks at Number 10.
EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, NATO secretary general Mark Rutte, and Turkey’s foreign minister Hakan Fidan will also attend the summit.
It is hoped the meeting will help to get things “back on track”, a government source has told Sky News.
However, they admitted there will be “more ups and downs” ahead.
“We must keep our eyes on the prize.”
The insider added that the government was “working yesterday to get [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy back to the table” and finish the minerals deal with the US.
That was thrown into question on Friday during the clash at the White House.
The source said: “We think it’s the right thing to do. Today is about getting European leaders to go beyond the Twitter rhetoric and step up on defence spending – prepare now for a world with no US security guarantee for Europe, not just in Ukraine.”