Rishi Sunak urged to sack Suella Braverman over ‘deeply offensive’ article on pro-Palestinian marches

Published

2 years ago

November 9, 2023

admin

Rishi Sunak has been urged to sack Suella Braverman after she accused the Metropolitan Police of “playing favourites” with how it handles controversial protests.

Ms Braverman has been criticised for using “inflammatory” language in an article for the Times newspaper.

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”.

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.

Politics latest: ‘She’s on a mission to get sacked’

“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.

Israel-Gaza latest:
‘Security circumstance’ forces Rafah border crossing to close

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.

“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 Rigby that 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.

More on this story:
Does Braverman relish being controversial?
Braverman has displayed breathtaking ignorance on NI

“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.

Mr Sunak confirmed on Wednesday that the pro-Palestinian march on Armistice Day would go ahead, but said Sir Mark would be held “accountable” for his decision to give the event the green light.

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.

UK

Southend Airport remains closed after ‘fireball’ plane crash

Published

1 hour ago

July 14, 2025

admin

Southend Airport remains closed after 'fireball' plane crash

Southend Airport has been closed until further notice after a small plane crashed – as video footage emerged showing the aftermath of a huge fireball.

Images posted online showed large flames and a cloud of black smoke following the incident on Sunday afternoon.

Essex Police said it responded to “reports of a collision involving one 12-metre plane” shortly before 4pm.

“We are working with all emergency services at the scene now and that work will be ongoing for several hours,” the statement said.

“We would please ask the public to avoid this area where possible while this work continues.”

Southend Airport said it would be “closed until further notice” due to the “serious incident”.

“We ask that any passengers due to travel (on Monday) via London Southend Airport contact their airline for information and advice,” it added.

Zeusch Aviation, based at Lelystad Airport in the Netherlands, confirmed its SUZ1 flight had been “involved in an accident” at the airport and its thoughts were with “everyone who has been affected”.

It has been reported that the plane involved in the incident is a Beech B200 Super King Air.

According to flight-tracking service Flightradar, it took off at 3.48pm and was bound for Lelystad, a city in the Netherlands.

Pilots ‘waved’ to families watching planes

One man, who was at the airport with his wife and children, told Sky News the plane crashed within seconds of taking off.

John Johnson said the pilots “waved” at his family as they taxied the aircraft.

“We all waved [back] at them,” he continued. “They carried on taxiing to their take-off point and turned around.

“Then they throttled up the engines and passed by us. The aircraft took off and within a few seconds it had a steep bank angle to its left.”

The aircraft then “almost seemed to invert and unfortunately crashed,” he said. “There was a large fireball.”

‘Airport was in lockdown’

Wren Stranix, 16, from Woodbridge in Suffolk, was in another aircraft waiting to take off for Newquay, Cornwall, with her family and boyfriend when the plane came down.

They watched from their aircraft as the emergency services arrived and were not able to leave their seats.

“The flight attendant didn’t know what was going on,” she told Sky News. “They said the plane had exploded and they didn’t know if it was safe or not. The airport was in lockdown.”

They were eventually allowed back in the terminal to wait before all flights were cancelled.

Southend Airport said the incident involved “a general aviation aircraft”.

After the incident, EasyJet – one of just a few airlines that uses the airport – said all of its remaining flights to and from Southend had been “diverted to alternative airports or are no longer able to operate”.

The airline said it has contacted customers who were due to travel on Sunday. Anyone due to fly on Monday should check online for up-to-date information, it added.

Essex County Fire and Rescue Service said four crews, along with off-road vehicles, have attended the scene.

The East of England Ambulance Service said four ambulances, four hazardous area response team vehicles and an air ambulance had been sent to the incident.

David Burton-Sampson, the MP for Southend West and Leigh, asked people to keep away from the area and “allow the emergency services to do their work” in a post on social media.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said she was “monitoring the situation closely and receiving regular updates”.

Essex Police have set up a dedicated public portal and phone line where people can contact them about the crash at https://esxpol.uk/LIbaz and on 0800 0961011.

Chief Superintendent Morgan Cronin said: “In these very early stages it is vital we gather the information we need, and continue supporting the people of Essex.”

He added: “We are working closely with all at the scene, as well as the Air Accident Investigation Branch, to establish what has happened today and why.”

UK

Gregg Wallace: Half the allegations against MasterChef presenter substantiated, including one of unwanted physical contact

Published

3 hours ago

July 14, 2025

admin

Gregg Wallace: Half the allegations against MasterChef presenter substantiated, including one of unwanted physical contact

An investigation into Gregg Wallace’s “inappropriate behaviour” on MasterChef has found that more than half of the allegations against him have been substantiated, including one of “unwanted physical contact”.

MasterChef’s production company Banijay UK shared a summary of its report into historical allegations of misconduct against the 60-year-old presenter, carried out by independent law firm Lewis Silkin over seven months.

The report also said the number of sustained allegations made Wallace’s return to MasterChef “untenable”.

The investigation heard evidence from 78 witnesses, including 41 complainants.

There were 83 allegations against Wallace, and 45 of them were substantiated. All were related to MasterChef.

While the majority of the substantiated allegations related to inappropriate sexual language and humour, a smaller number of allegations of other inappropriate language and being in a state of undress were also substantiated.

One allegation of unwanted physical contact was substantiated.

Nearly all the allegations against Wallace were related to behaviour which is said to have occurred between 2005 and 2018, with just one substantiated allegation taking place post-2018.

Ahead of the publication of the summary, Wallace had said he had been “cleared of the most serious and sensational accusations” made against him.

Additionally, the report summary found that there were also 10 standalone allegations about other people between 2012 and 2018/2019, two of which were substantiated. Those people were not named in the summary.

The investigation found that complaints had previously been raised with the production company between 2005 and 2024.

While the report flagged inadequate reporting procedures prior to 2016, when Endemol merged with Shine ahead of Banijay acquiring Endemol Shine in 2020, it said there were significant improvements to HR processes and training after 2016.

While the investigation said some formal action was taken by the BBC in 2017, it also noted the corporation held no information regarding concerns raised over Wallace centrally, resulting in issues being addressed as a first offence.

Sky News has tried to contact Gregg Wallace for contact today.

UK

Palace confirms dates of Trump’s state visit – as King and Queen to host him at Windsor Castle

Published

10 hours ago

July 14, 2025

admin

Palace confirms dates of Trump's state visit - as King and Queen to host him at Windsor Castle

The dates for Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK have been announced, with the US president due to be welcomed by the King from 17 to 19 September.

Buckingham Palace also confirmed that President Trump and first lady Melania will be hosted by the King and Queen at Windsor Castle.

It was expected that the three-day state visit would take place in September after Mr Trump let slip earlier in April that he believed that was when his second “fest” was being planned for.

Windsor was also anticipated to be the location after the US president told reporters in the Oval Office that the letter from the King said Windsor would be the setting. Refurbishment works at Buckingham Palace also meant that Windsor was used last week for French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit.

This will be Mr Trump’s second state visit to the UK, an unprecedented gesture towards an American leader, having previously been invited to Buckingham Palace in 2019.

He has also been to Windsor Castle before, in 2018, but despite the considerable military pageantry of the day, and some confusion around inspecting the guard, it was simply for tea with Queen Elizabeth II.

Further details of what will happen during the three-day visit in September will be announced in due course.

On Friday, Sky News revealed it is now unlikely that the US president will address parliament, usually an honour given to visiting heads of state as part of their visit. Some MPs had raised significant concerns about him being given the privilege.

But the House of Commons will not be sitting at the time of Mr Trump’s visit as it will rise for party conference season on the 16 September, meaning the president will not be able to speak in parliament as President Macron did during his state visit this week. However, the House of Lords will be sitting.

In February this year, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer presented the US president with the letter from the King inviting him to visit during a meeting at the White House.

After reading it, Mr Trump said it was a “great, great honour”, adding “and that says at Windsor – that’s really something”.

In the letter, the King suggested they might meet at Balmoral or Dumfries House in Scotland first before the much grander state visit. However, it is understood that, although all options were explored, complexities in both the King and Mr Trump’s diaries meant it wasn’t possible.

This week, it emerged that Police Scotland are planning for a summer visit from the US president, which is likely to see him visit one or both of his golf clubs in Aberdeenshire and Ayrshire, and require substantial policing resources and probably units to be called in from elsewhere in the UK.

Precedent for second-term US presidents, who have already made a state visit, is usually tea or lunch with the monarch at Windsor Castle, as was the case for George W Bush and Barack Obama.