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.
Swiss crypto bank AMINA Bank AG said it has secured regulatory approval in Hong Kong to offer crypto trading and custody services to institutional clients in the region, adding its the first international bank to receive such permission.
AMINA said the “Type 1 license uplift” received from the Securities and Futures Commission would help it address a gap in the Hong Kong institutional crypto market, which has faced limited access to bank-grade crypto services due to the region’s high regulatory compliance standards.
The license will allow AMINA’s Hong Kong subsidiary to offer 13 cryptocurrencies — including Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH), USDC (USDC), Tether (USDT) and major decentralized finance tokens.
📢 Crypto trading and custody – now available at AMINA Hong Kong!
Today, AMINA becomes the first international banking group to launch comprehensive crypto trading and custody services in Hong Kong.
It comes as AMINA reported a 233% increase in trading volume on Hong Kong crypto exchanges in the first half of 2025 compared to the same period last year, indicating that both retail and institutional traders are increasingly embracing the asset class.
Michael Benz, head of AMINA for Hong Kong, stated that the license would enable the company to expand into private fund management, structured products, derivatives and tokenized real-world assets, thereby providing a wider range of crypto offerings for its client base.
Hong Kong courts international crypto firms
Hong Kong has been positioning itself as a global crypto hub, and the latest approval could encourage other foreign firms to consider the market.
While AMINA claims to be the first international firm to win a Type 1 license upgrade, it is entering a market already serviced by local players such as Tiger Brokers, HashKey, and others.
Hong Kong launched new stablecoin rules in August
Hong Kong has adopted a cautious approach to crypto. It rolled out long-awaited stablecoin rules in August — prompting HSBC and ICBC to consider seeking licenses soon after.
Hong Kong tightened rules around self-custodying crypto in August, though the move was aimed more at reducing cybersecurity risks than restricting user freedom.
The home secretary has admitted the UK’s illegal immigrant numbers are “too high” – but said Nigel Farage can “sod off” after he claimed she sounded like a Reform supporter.
Speaking to Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby, the home secretary said: “I acknowledge the numbers are too high, and they’ve gone up, and I want to bring them down.
“I’m impatient to bring those numbers down.”
She refused to “set arbitrary numbers” on how much she wanted to bring illegal migration down to.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:40
Beth Rigby: The two big problems with Labour’s asylum plan
Earlier on Monday, Ms Mahmood announced a new direction in Labour’s plan to crack down on asylum seekers.
The “restoring order and control” plan includes:
• The removal of more families with children – either voluntarily through cash incentives up to £3,000, or by force; • Quadrupling the time successful asylum seekers must wait to claim permanent residency in the UK, from five years to 20; • Removing the legal obligation to provide financial support to asylum seekers, so those with the right to work but choose not to will receive no support; • Setting up a new appeals body to significantly speed up the time it takes to decide whether to refuse an asylum application; • Reforming how the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is interpreted in immigration cases; • Banning visas for countries refusing to accept deportees; • And the establishment of new safe and legal refugee routes.
The home secretary wants to make it less attractive for illegal migrants to try to get to the UK by making it much harder to get permanent residence here, by overhauling human rights laws to make it harder for illegal migrants to stay, and by suspending UK visas to some countries who refuse to take back illegal migrants.
That’s the plan, but there are two really big problems.
The first one is the Labour Party.
Labour knows it has to try to win back voters turning to Reform, but also risks a backlash from those with more liberal values who believe Mahmood is abandoning what Labour stands for to them.
That’s the politics. But on the policy, they just have to deliver and so much is at stake.
There’s no doubt Keir Starmer’s Number 10 is in real trouble.
There’s now open chatter about whether he should lead Labour into the next general election and whether his chancellor really is the person to deliver on the economy as she faces into that very difficult budget.
With the government in the doldrums, there is a lot riding on this policy and this politician.
Beth was speaking after her interview with Shabana Mahmood, watch her full analysis in the video above.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the plan was much like something his party would put forward, and said Ms Mahmood sounded like a Reform supporter.
The home secretary responded with her usual frankness, telling Rigby: “Nigel Farage can sod off. I’m not interested in anything he’s got to say.
“He’s making mischief. So I’m not going to let him live forever in my head.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:09
Home secretary announces details on asylum reform
You might need our support, says Badenoch
Her plans have also been tentatively welcomed by the Conservatives, with Kemi Badenoch suggesting the home secretary work with her in case of a rebellion by Labour MPs.
The backing of Tory MPs could “come in handy”, Ms Badenoch said.
The government’s attempts to cut the welfare bill earlier this year were thwarted by its own backbenchers, and the proposals announced on Monday have already attracted backlash from some on the left of the Labour Party.
Nadia Whittome MP called Ms Mahmood’s plans “dystopian” and “shameful”, while Richard Burgon MP said she should change course now rather than be forced into a U-turn later.
Image: Nigel Farage said the home secretary was sounding like a Reform supporter
Mahmood’s warning to Labour MPs
But Ms Mahmood has warned her colleagues that disrupting her bid to reform the asylum system – thus hoping to bring down the number of small boat crossings – risks “dark forces” coming to prominence.
Speaking in the House of Commons on Monday evening, Ms Mahmood said: “If we fail to deal with this crisis, we will draw more people down a path that starts with anger and ends in hatred.”
She later told Beth Rigby that Reform wanted to “rip up” indefinite leave to remain altogether, which she called “immoral” and “deeply shameful”.
The home secretary, who is a practising Muslim, was born in Birmingham to her Pakistani parents.
Earlier, in the House of Commons, she said she sees the division that migration and the asylum system are creating across the country. She told MPs she regularly endures racial slurs.
MPs and bereaved families have launched a new campaign urging the government to re-think its position on introducing Graduated Driving Licences.
The event, in Parliament, came at the start of Road Safety Week and ahead of the government’s highly anticipated new road safety strategy, the first in a decade, which could be published next month.
Kim Leadbeater MP told the gathering that the idea for tougher rules for new drivers “transcends party politics” and could leave to “saving people’s lives”.
Image: Five young adults died in a crash in Ireland on Saturday night. Pic: PA
Organisations, including fire services, police and crime commissioners, motoring organisations as well as road safety charities, are behind a new website, “Protect Young Drivers: Time for Change”, which documents the case for introducing stronger measures.
Graduated Driving Licences (GDLs) is a system designed to give new drivers a staggered approach to gaining full privileges on the road, such as driving at night or with a full car of passengers.
The system has been successful in countries including Canada and Australia at reducing the number of young people killed or seriously injured.
“I feel as a bereaved parent we are very easily dismissed”
More on Roads
Related Topics:
Last year 22% of fatalities on Britain’s roads involved a young person behind the wheel.
Data released by the Department for Transport also shows that male drivers aged 17-24 are four times more likely to be killed or seriously injured than all drivers aged over 25.
Chris Taylor, who lost his 18-year-old daughter Rebecca in a road traffic collision in 2008, said the grief doesn’t go away.
“I feel as a bereaved parent we are very easily dismissed,” he said. “We’ve got an opportunity. Together we are a movement that can create real change.”
The Department for Transport has previously told Sky News it is not considering GDLs.
“Every death on our roads is a tragedy and our thoughts are with everyone who has lost a loved one in this way,” said a spokesperson.
“Whilst we are not considering Graduated Driving Licences, we absolutely recognise that young people are disproportionately victims of tragic incidents on our roads and continue to tackle this through our THINK! campaign.
“We are considering other measures to address this problem and protect young drivers, as part of our upcoming strategy for road safety – the first in over a decade.”