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.
The Blockchain Association, Crypto Council for Innovation and fintech allies urged the CFPB to finalize an open banking rule ensuring consumers, not banks, control their data.
The UK is ready to spend “well over” £100m on a possible deployment of British forces to Ukraine if Donald Trump secures a peace deal with Russia, the defence secretary has said.
John Healey also said Vladimir Putin views Britain as his “number one enemy” because of the country’s support for Ukraine.
The defence secretary’s plan includes the preparation of military personnel to join a multinational force that would be sent to help secure Ukraine’s borders if the US president brokers a ceasefire between Moscow and Kyiv.
He signalled British troops could be ready to deploy as soon as that happened and he said this could include soldiers on the ground.
Some of the anticipated money to prepare for any mission is already being spent.
The defence secretary also warned of a “new era of threat” and said the risk of wider conflict in Europe has not been as great since the end of the Second World War.
Mr Healey used a lecture at Mansion House in London to talk about efforts led by the UK and France to build a “coalition of the willing” of more than 30 nations to form what he called a “Multinational Force Ukraine” over the past six months.
Image: At Mansion House this evening. Pic: PA
This force would help to secure Ukraine’s skies and seas and train its troops if Russia agrees to halt its full-scale war.
“So, as President Trump leads the push for peace here in Europe, we are ready to lead the work to secure it in the long-term,” the defence secretary said.
“For our Armed Forces, I am already reviewing readiness levels and accelerating millions of pounds of funding to prepare for any possible deployment into Ukraine.”
Asked how much money, he said it would be “well over” £100m.
Image: British troops have been instrumental in the training of Ukrainian soliders throughout the conflict at camps like this one in East Anglia.Pic: PA
Mr Healey trumpeted the UK’s support for Ukraine, including a record £4.5bn in assistance this year, and taking over from the United States in co-chairing a wider group of nations that have been sending weapons and money to Kyiv.
“This is why President [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy calls the UK his closest ally,” he said.
“This is why Putin ranks Britain as his number one enemy.”
But he warned that as Russia’s aggression grew in Ukraine and beyond its borders, “Britain and our NATO allies stand more unified, and stronger”.
Giving a stark verdict of the security landscape, Mr Healey said: “This is – undeniably – a new era of threat. The world is more unstable, more uncertain, more dangerous. Not since the end of the Second World War has Europe’s security been at such risk of state-on-state conflict.”
He said this required what he described as “a new era for defence”.
He said: “This is now an age for hard power, strong alliances and sure diplomacy.”
Follow the World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
The defence secretary said plans for the new era would include increasing defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035 – though critics have accused the UK and other European allies of playing smoke and mirrors with the target, questioning how much will really be spent on weapons and troops.
“As I look ahead to the rest of this decade, our task, in this new age of hard power is to secure peace in our continent and to forge stronger deterrence and resilience, a New Deal for European security,” said Mr Healey.
Turning to the Middle East, he also announced the UK was sending a two-star military officer to work as the deputy to the US commander, charged with monitoring the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
The government will allow thousands of rapists, child sex offenders and other violent criminals to be released early from prison, the Conservatives claimed as a row over sentencing law reforms erupted.
Ahead of MPs debating the Sentencing Bill, introduced to tackle the growing prison population, on Tuesday, the Tories accused Labour of favouring criminals over victims and said the government’s approach is a “betrayal of victims”.
But Labour accused the Conservative Party of “rank hypocrisy” over prison overcrowding and the previous government’s early release policies.
The bill will restrict the use of short sentences and instead strengthen community punishments.
It will also include an “earned progression scheme”, which allows convicts who demonstrate good behaviour to be freed earlier, with enhanced supervision in the community followed by an unsupervised period on licence.
There will be a minimum release point of 33% for standard determinate sentences and a 50% minimum for more serious standard determinate sentences – as well as more tagging to monitor offenders in the community.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:36
Could a drone drop a gun into prison?
The Tories claim the bill as it is would mean 85% (6,500) of the most serious jailed offenders could qualify for early release because they are serving standard sentences, while more than 83% of child sex offenders and 62% of convicted rapists would serve reduced sentences.
More on Conservatives
Related Topics:
They have tabled an amendment to the bill to ensure a carve out for the most serious crimes, so those who commit assault by penetration, rape, grievous bodily harm, stalking and sexual offences against children cannot be released early.
Under Labour plans to abolish custodial sentences below 12 months, the Tories calculated up to 43,000 offenders could avoid jail altogether.
They said the bill could lead to permanent leniency in sentencing.
Conservative shadow justice minister Dr Kieran Mullan said: “Labour’s early release plan is a betrayal of victims and a gift to rapists and paedophiles. Keir Starmer is putting criminals before communities and letting predators out early.
“Under Labour’s plans, thousands of the most serious and sickening offences imaginable would no longer be treated as such. What an insult to thousands of victims across the country.
“Anyone who vote for these plans will have to explain exactly why these crimes do not count among the most serious offences.
“The Conservatives will fight this moral rot every step of the way.”
Image: Justice Secretary David Lammy at Belmarsh prison. Pic: PA
But sentencing minister Jake Richards accused the Tories of “rank hypocrisy” as he said the previous government took prisons to “breaking point”.
He said Labour are “cleaning up the mess” left by the Tories and accused them of “feigned outrage”.
“The Conservatives’ rank hypocrisy is shameful. They built this crisis, then feigned outrage when the consequences arrived,” he added.
“They took our prisons to breaking point, released thousands of serious offenders early and pushed Britain to the brink of a situation where police could no longer make arrests and courts could no longer prosecute.
“That would have been a total collapse of law and order.
“Now they attack us for cleaning up the mess they made. They are behaving like arsonists complaining the fire service couldn’t stop the flame.
“This Labour government believes in prison and in punishment that cuts crime.
“We’re delivering the biggest prison expansion since the Victorians, reforming sentencing to keep the public safe and building a justice system worthy of the name.”