Tory deputy chairmen resign party roles as government suffers significant rebellion on Rwanda bill

Published

1 year ago

January 16, 2024

admin

Two deputy chairs of the Conservative Party have resigned from their roles after they both supported rebel amendments to Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill.

Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith both said they would support proposed changes designed to toughen up Mr Sunak’s bill, which seeks to declare Rwanda a safe country to deport asylum seekers to.

Jane Stevenson, a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) in the Department for Business and Trade, resigned from her role after she supported two key rebel amendments.

On Tuesday night, MPs voted on a series of amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, including one submitted by veteran Tory MP Sir Bill Cash, whose amendment sought to disapply international law with regard to Rwanda being a safe country.

Politics latest: ‘Big’ Tory rebellion on PM’s Rwanda bill will cause ‘jitters’ in Tory high command

In total, 70 MPs backed Sir Bill’s amendment.

Sixty Tories, including two tellers who verify the count, supported the amendment, as did two independent MPs who were formerly in the Conservative parliamentary party – Scott Benton and Andrew Bridgen.

They were joined by eight MPs in the Democratic Unionist Party.

However, the amendment was rejected by 529 votes to 68, leaving a majority of 461.

Among the names who backed the amendment were former prime minister Liz Truss, ex-home secretary Suella Braverman, former immigration minister Robert Jenrick and the leaders of the New Conservatives Miriam Cates and Danny Kruger.

The result represents a significant rebellion and potentially spells trouble for the prime minister ahead of the third reading vote on the whole bill on Wednesday, when rebels may vote against it.

Speaking to Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby, Tory MP Mark Francois said the numbers “speak for themselves” and that he hoped the government “will listen and take stock” and possibly tighten the bill.

Mr Kruger, the co-chair of the New Conservatives, told the Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge he was “prepared” to vote against the bill at third reading.

Warning signs for the prime minister

Sam Coates

Deputy political editor

@SamCoatesSky

Tory Rwanda rebels have shown their hand.

They have been able to demonstrate their side is willing to go further than before Christmas – and that they have the numbers to defeat the government on Wednesday.

The question now is whether the government is prepared to risk a defeat by going ahead on Wednesday, or whether ministers abandon a plan to hold a vote in fear of defeat.

READ MORE

“I really hope that the scale of the vote in favour of the amendments that were debated today will convince the government that they really should adopt these amendments as their own,” he said.

However, in an illustration of the dilemma Mr Sunak faces in appeasing the various factions of his party, Damian Green, chair of the One Nation group of moderate Tory MPs, said he would vote against the bill if it was toughened up further as the right-wing rebels demand.

But, he said he believed the “high watermark” of the Rwanda rebellion was reached on Tuesday evening.

Mr Sunak had been prepared for a collision with right-wing Tories over the bill, which is aimed at reviving Mr Sunak’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda if they attempt to come to the UK via small boat crossings in the Channel.

The bill, which is designed to enable parliament to confirm Rwanda is a “safe country”, gives ministers the powers to disregard sections of the Human Rights Act, but does not go as far as allowing them to dismiss the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) entirely – a demand of some on the right.

As well as the amendment by Sir Bill, MPs also voted on an amendment by Mr Jenrick which sought to make it more difficult for individuals to make claims against their deportation.

MPs rejected it by 525 votes to 61 votes, among them 59 Tories, including tellers.

In a joint resignation letter, Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith said they supported the amendments “not because we are against the legislation, but because like everybody else we want it to work”.

“Our support for the party and this government remains as strong as ever and that is why we are so passionate about making this legislation work.

“However, we fully appreciate that with such important roles there is also the issue of being bound by collective responsibility.

“It is with this in mind that we fully appreciate that whilst our main wish is to strengthen the legislation, this means that in order to vote for amendments we will therefore need to offer you our resignations from our roles.”

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael MP said: “Sunak’s Rwanda scheme just won’t work – and even the deputy chairmen of his own party know it.

“Rishi Sunak has yet again been embarrassed by his own MPs.”

A Downing Street source said Mr Sunak accepted the resignations of Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith and added: “This is the toughest legislation ever brought before parliament to tackle illegal migration.

“This bill will make it clear that if you come here illegally you will not be able to stay. We must pass this bill to deliver what all Conservatives want – a credible plan to stop the boats.”

Politics

‘Will the PM side with parents or tech bros?’: Labour peer demands action on children’s smartphone safety

Published

1 hour ago

April 4, 2025

admin

'Will the PM side with parents or tech bros?': Labour peer demands action on children's smartphone safety

Sir Keir Starmer needs to choose between parents who want stronger action to tackle harmful content on children’s phones, or the “tech bros” who are resisting changes to their platforms, Baroness Harriet Harman has said.

Speaking to Beth Rigby on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer noted that the prime minister met with the creators of hit Netflix drama Adolescence to discuss safety on social media, but she questioned if he is going to take action to “stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff” on their platforms where children can access it.

Sir Keir hosted a roundtable on Monday with Adolescence co-writer Jack Thorne and producer Jo Johnson to discuss issues raised in the series, which centres on a 13-year-old boy arrested for the murder of a young girl, and the rise of incel culture.

Politics latest: Could the UK retaliate against Trump?

The aim was to discuss how to prevent young boys being dragged into a “whirlpool of hatred and misogyny”, and the prime minister said the four-part series raises questions about how to keep young people safe from technology.

Sir Keir has backed calls for the four-part drama to be shown in all schools across the country, but Baroness Harman questioned what is going to be achieved by having young people simply watch the show.

“Two questions were raised [for me],” she said. ” Firstly – after they’ve watched it, what is going to be the discussion afterwards?

“And secondly, is he going to act to stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff to go online into smartphones without protection of children?

“Because if the tech companies wanted to do this, they could actually protect children. They can do everything they want with their tech.”

She acknowledged there are “very big public policy challenges” in this area, but added of the prime minister: “Is he going to side with parents who are terrified and want this content off their children’s phones, or is he going to accept the tech bros’ resistance to having to make changes?”

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

Can parliament keep up?

The Labour peer backed the Conservative Party’s call for a ban on smartphones in schools to be mandated from Westminster, saying it would “enable all schools not to have a discussion with their parents or to battle it out, but just to say, this is the ruling” from central government, which Ofsted would then enforce.

“I’m sensitive to the idea that we shouldn’t constantly be telling schools what to do,” she continued. “And they’ve got a lot of common sense and a lot of professional experience, and they should have as much autonomy as possible.

“But perhaps it’s easier for them if it’s done top down.”

Baroness Harman also questioned the speed with which parliament is actually able to legislate to deal with the very rapid development of new technologies, and posits that it could “change its processes to be able to legislate in real time”.

She suggested that a “powerful select committee” of MPs could be established to do that, because “otherwise we talk about it, and then we’re not able to legislate for 10 years – by which time that problem has really set in, and we’ve got a whole load more problems”.

On the podcast, the trio also discussed the 10% tariffs imposed on the UK by Donald Trump and the government’s efforts to strike a trade deal with the US to mitigate the impact of the levy.

The government has refused to rule out scrapping the Digital Services Tax, a 2% levy on tech giants’ revenues in the UK, as part of the negotiations with the Trump administration – a move Baroness Harman said would be “very heartbreaking”.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

Politics

Bakkt investors file class-action lawsuit after loss of Webull, BoA contracts

Published

4 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Bakkt investors file class-action lawsuit after loss of Webull, BoA contracts

A group of investors with cryptocurrency custody and trading firm Bakkt Holdings filed a class-action lawsuit alleging false or misleading statements and a failure to disclose certain information.

Lead plaintiff Guy Serge A. Franklin called for a jury trial as part of a complaint against Bakkt, senior adviser and former CEO Gavin Michael, CEO and president Andrew Main, and interim chief financial officer Karen Alexander, according to an April 2 filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The group of investors allege damages as the result of violations of US securites laws and a lack of transparency surrounding its agreement with clients: Webull and Bank of America (BoA).

Law, Investments, United States, Bakkt — *April 2 complaint against Bakkt and its executives. Source: PACER*

The loss of Bank of America and Webull will result “in a 73% loss in top line revenue” due to the two firms making up a significant percentage of its services revenue, the investor group alleges in the lawsuit. The filing stated Webull made up 74% of Bakkt’s crypto services revenue through most of 2023 and 2024, and Bank of America made up 17% of its loyalty services revenue from January to September 2024.

Bakkt disclosed on March 17 that Bank of America and Webull did not intend to renew their agreements with the firm ending in 2025. The announcement likely contributed to the company’s share price falling more than 27% in the following 24 hours. The investors allege Bakkt “misrepresented the stability and/or diversity of its crypto services revenue” and failed to disclose that this revenue was “substantially dependent” on Webull’s contract.

“As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages,” said the suit.

Other law offices said they were investigating Bakkt for securities law violations, suggesting additional class-action lawsuits may be in the works. Cointelegraph contacted Bakkt for a comment on the lawsuit but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Prices affected by Trump Media reports

Bakkt’s share price surged roughly 162% in November 2024 after reports suggested that then-US President-elect Donald Trump’s media company was considering acquiring the firm. As of April 2025, neither company has officially announced a deal.

Shares in Bakkt (BKKT) were $8.15 at the time of publication, having fallen more than 36% in the previous 30 days.

Magazine: Meet lawyer Max Burwick — ‘The ambulance chaser of crypto’

Politics

Trump tariffs squeeze already struggling Bitcoin miners — Braiins exec

Published

11 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Trump tariffs squeeze already struggling Bitcoin miners — Braiins exec

The new trade tariffs announced by US President Donald Trump may place added pressure on the Bitcoin mining ecosystem both domestically and globally, according to one industry executive.

While the US is home to Bitcoin (BTC) mining manufacturing firms such as Auradine, it’s still “not possible to make the whole supply chain, including materials, US-based,” Kristian Csepcsar, chief marketing officer at BTC mining tech provider Braiins, told Cointelegraph.

On April 2, Trump announced sweeping tariffs, imposing a 10% tariff on all countries that export to the US and introducing “reciprocal” levies targeting America’s key trading partners.

Community members have debated the potential effects of the tariffs on Bitcoin, with some saying their impact has been overstated, while others see them as a significant threat.

Tariffs compound existing mining challenges

Csepcsar said the mining industry is already experiencing tough times, pointing to key indicators like the BTC hashprice.

Hashprice — a measure of a miner’s daily revenue per unit of hash power spent to mine BTC blocks — has been on the decline since 2022 and dropped to all-time lows of $50 for the first time in 2024.

According to data from Bitbo, the BTC hashprice was still hovering around all-time low levels of $53 on March 30.

“Hashprice is the key metric miners follow to understand their bottom line. It is how many dollars one terahash makes a day. A key profitability metric, and it is at all-time lows, ever,” Csepcsar said.

He added that mining equipment tariffs were already increasing under the Biden administration in 2024, and cited comments from Summer Meng, general manager at Chinese crypto mining supplier Bitmars.

“But they keep getting stricter under Trump,” Csepcsar added, referring to companies such as the China-based Bitmain — the world’s largest ASIC manufacturer — which is subject to the new tariffs.

Trump’s latest measures include a 34% additional tariff on top of an existing 20% levy for Chinese mining imports. In response, China reportedly imposed its own retaliatory tariffs on April 4.

BTC mining firms to “lose in the short term”

Csepcsar also noted that cutting-edge chips for crypto mining are currently massively produced in countries like Taiwan and South Korea, which were hit by new 32% and 25% tariffs, respectively.

“It will take a decade for the US to catch up with cutting-edge chip manufacturing. So again, companies, including American ones, lose in the short term,” he said.

Csepcsar also observed that some countries in the Commonwealth of Independent States region, including Russia and Kazakhstan, have been beefing up mining efforts and could potentially overtake the US in hashrate dominance.

“If we continue to see trade war, these regions with low tariffs and more favorable mining conditions can see a major boom,” Csepcsar warned.

As the newly announced tariffs potentially hurt Bitcoin mining both globally and in the US, it may become more difficult for Trump to keep his promise of making the US the global mining leader.

Trump’s stance on crypto has shifted multiple times over the years. As his administration embraces a more pro-crypto agenda, it remains to be seen how the latest economic policies will impact his long-term strategy for digital assets.

Magazine: Bitcoin ATH sooner than expected? XRP may drop 40%, and more: Hodler’s Digest, March 23 – 29