Connect with us

Published

on

Liberal Democrat peers are poised to ignore a convention dating back to Gladstone’s day to stage a protest against the Rwanda bill in the House of Lords.

The Lib Dem group has announced that its 80 peers will vote against the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill at its second reading next Monday.

It’s a highly unusual move and won’t win support from Labour peers, who regard such tactics as a publicity stunt used by smaller parties like the Lib Dems to gain media coverage.

Politics latest:
Red Sea crisis ‘may get more tricky’

And Downing Street is urging peers “not to frustrate the will of the people”, claiming that as the Rwanda bill has the support of the Commons it should be passed by the Lords.

Traditionally, opposition parties don’t vote against government bills at second reading in the Lords, but instead move amendments at committee stage which are then voted on at report stage.

But the Liberal Democrats claim that since the Rwanda policy wasn’t in the Conservative general election manifesto, the convention supported by Labour and the Tories doesn’t apply.

More on Conservatives

Last year, the Lib Dems moved a motion to “decline” the government’s Illegal Migration Bill at its second reading in the Lords. That was rejected by 179 votes to 76 and a similar result is likely this time.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sunak warns Lords over Rwanda Bill

The deal between the major parties is known as the Salisbury-Addison Convention, which evolved because of big Conservative majorities in the House of Lords during Liberal and Labour governments.

Lord Salisbury was Conservative prime minister in the 1880s and 90s, before and after Liberal giant William Gladstone, and Lord Addison was Labour leader in the Lords after Clement Attlee’s 1945 general election landslide.

But a government defeat in the Lords this week, on a motion to delay ratifying the Rwanda treaty until safeguards have been implemented, has emboldened the Lib Dems to defy the convention again.

In a defeat that spells trouble for Rishi Sunak, peers voted by 214 votes to 171, a hefty majority of 43, in favour of calls for protections to be introduced before deportation flights can take off for Rwanda.

Read more:
Rwanda plan suffers first defeat in House of Lords
Path to plan success harder after symbolic Lords defeat

What is the plan and why is it controversial?
How policy became a leadership issue for Sunak

Revealing the Lib Dems’ intention to vote against the bill, a spokesperson told Sky News: “From the beginning, Liberal Democrats have been clear: We have no faith in the Conservatives’ failing Rwanda scheme.

“It’s totally unworkable and extortionately expensive for the taxpayer. Of course, we all want to stop boat crossings in the channel, but this policy will do nothing of the sort.

“So much time and money has already been wasted, with nothing to show for it. Instead, we want a long-term sustainable solution, which must include an efficient processing system to clear the asylum backlog, and safe and legal routes for refugees.

“We have opposed the bill every step of the way, voting against it at every stage in the Commons. It should be no surprise that our strategy will be the same in the Lords.”

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

A party source added: “The Rwanda bill is not a manifesto bill. We wouldn’t be voting against it if was in a manifesto. And the convention was a pact between the Tories and Labour. We’re not formally a party to it.

“We voted against the Illegal Migration Bill at second reading and we feel the same way about the Rwanda bill. Since the Lords voted against the treaty this week it makes logical sense to vote against the bill as well.”

But a Labour source told Sky News: “No. We’re not backing it. Why would we stop abiding by our long-term commitment to the Salisbury-Addison convention?

“The whole thing of trying to stop a second reading is obviously a way of a smaller party getting some coverage for something that won’t happen.”

Reacting to the defeat on the Rwanda treaty and looking ahead to the bill’s second reading, a Number 10 Downing Street source told Sky News: “It’s disappointing, but Labour are once again voting against our plans to stop the boats.

“We urge the Lords not to frustrate the will of the people.

“This is the toughest legislation ever introduced in Parliament to tackle illegal migration and makes clear that if you come here illegally you will not be able to stay.

“The bill has the support of the Commons, it is now in the House of Lords. We need to get this through to ensure we get flights off to Rwanda, deter people from making perilous journeys across the Channel and stop the boats.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto isn’t crashing the American dream; it’s renovating it

Published

on

By

Crypto isn’t crashing the American dream; it’s renovating it

Crypto isn’t crashing the American dream; it’s renovating it

The US housing regulator’s decision to recognize crypto assets in mortgage applications marks a historic shift from exclusion to integration, opening new pathways to homeownership.

Continue Reading

Politics

Govt vows to protect ‘pavement pints’ and make it easier for pubs to extend their opening hours

Published

on

By

Govt vows to protect 'pavement pints' and make it easier for pubs to extend their opening hours

“A wave of new cafes, bars, music venues and outdoor dining” could come to the UK – as the government unveils plans to overhaul planning rules and “breathe new life into the high street”.

Under the proposals, ministers also want to reform licensing rules to make it easier for disused shops to be converted into hospitality venues.

In a statement, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said she planned to scrap “clunky, outdated rules… to protect pavement pints, al fresco dining and street parties”.

The reforms also aim to prevent existing pubs, clubs, and music venues from suffering noise complaints when new properties hit the market.

Developers who decide to build near those sites will be required to soundproof their buildings.

Customers drink in an outdoor seating area of a pub in London during pandemic in December 2021
Image:
Reuters file pic

As part of dedicated “hospitality zones”, permission for al fresco dining, street parties and extended opening hours will be fast-tracked.

The government says the reforms aim to modernise outdated planning and licensing rules as part of its Plan for Change, to help small businesses and improve local communities.

More on Hospitality

The rough plans will be subject to a “call for evidence” which could further shape policy.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the proposals will “put the buzz back into our town centres”.

“Red tape has stood in the way of people’s business ideas for too long. Today we’re slashing those barriers to giving small business owners the freedom to flourish,” he said.

The hospitality industry has broadly welcomed the changes but argued tax reform was also essential.

Kate Nicholls, chairwoman of UKHospitality, described the proposals as “positive and encouraging”.

However, she added: “They can’t on their own offset the immediate and mounting cost pressures facing hospitality businesses which threaten to tax out of existence the businesses and jobs that today’s announcement seeks to support.”

Read more from Sky News:
Licensing reforms for London venues
Pubs forced to adapt to survive

While supporting the reforms, Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA), had a similar message.

“These changes must go hand in hand with meaningful business rates reform, mitigating staggering employment costs, and a cut in beer duty so that pubs can thrive at the heart of the community,” she said.

In July, BBPA estimated that 378 pubs will shut this year across England, Wales and Scotland, compared with 350 closures in 2024, which it said would amount to more than 5,600 direct job losses.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Pubs closing at a rate of one a day

Bar chain Brewdog announced this week that it would close 10 sites, partly blaming “rising costs, increased regulation, and economic pressures”.

Andrew Griffith MP, shadow business secretary, said: “Though any cutting of red tape for hospitality businesses is welcome, this is pure hypocrisy and inconsistency from Labour.”

He said the government was “crippling the hospitality industry by doubling business rates, imposing a jobs tax and a full-on strangulation of employment red tape”.

Continue Reading

Politics

Heathrow-funded group sending ‘incredibly misleading’ mail to homes across west London, campaigners allege

Published

on

By

Heathrow-funded group sending 'incredibly misleading' mail to homes across west London, campaigners allege

A campaign group for a third runway at Heathrow that gets funding from the airport has been distributing “incredibly misleading” information to households in west London, according to opponents of the expansion.

The group, called Back Heathrow, sent leaflets to people living near the airport, claiming expansion could be the route to a “greener” airport and suggesting it would mean only the “cleanest and quietest aircraft” fly there.

It comes as the airport prepares to submit its planning application for a third runway ahead of the 31 July deadline, following the government’s statement of support for the expansion.

File photo dated 4/1/2016 of an Emirates Airbus A380 plane lands over houses near Heathrow Airport, west London. Exposure to aircraft noise could increase the likelihood of suffering heart attacks, according to a study. Researchers at University College London (UCL) found people who live near airports - and are subjected to noise from planes taking off and landing - may be at greater risk of poor heart health. Issue date: Wednesday January 8, 2025.
Image:
A plane lands over houses near Heathrow Airport. Pic: PA

Back Heathrow calls itself a “local campaign group of over 100,000 residents” and does not mention the funding it receives from the airport in the newsletter.

Its website also does not mention the current financial support and says it “initially launched with funding from Heathrow Airport but we have since grown”.

Back Heathrow also told Sky News it had “always been open” about the support it receives from the airport.

At the bottom of every web page, the organisation says: “Back Heathrow is a group of residents, businesses and community groups who have come together to defend the jobs that rely on Heathrow and to campaign for its secure future.”

Heathrow Airport said it had always been clear about funding Back Heathrow, but would not disclose how much it provides.

Parmjit Dhanda in 2009 at the hustings to be Speaker of the House of Commons. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Parmjit Dhanda in 2009 at the hustings to be Speaker of the House of Commons. Pic: Reuters

Who’s behind Back Heathrow?

The group’s executive director is former Labour minister Parmjit Dhanda, who was MP for Gloucester from 2001 to 2010 and sits on the National Policy Forum – the body responsible for developing Labour policy.

Latest accounts for Back Heathrow show it had five employees, including its two directors, in the financial year ending 30 June 2024. The second director is John Braggins, a former campaign adviser to Tony Blair.

The business had £243,961 in cash, the accounts show.

What are the group saying?

In the newsletter, executive director Mr Dhanda said people ask if Heathrow is sustainable. In answering the question, he appeared to suggest the airport can dictate what types of planes use Heathrow.

“We can build a cleaner, greener and smarter airport – using more sustainable aviation fuel, ensuring only the cleanest and quietest aircraft fly here, reduce stacking in our skies and modernise our airspace to cut emissions in flight,” he wrote.

When asked by Sky News what Back Heathrow meant and what the source for the claim was, the organisation pointed to the airport’s traffic light system of noise and emission measurements for the 50 largest airlines serving Heathrow.

“The scheme helps to see what areas certain airlines are excelling in and where improvements can be made,” a spokesperson said.

But those “cleaner and greener” claims were dismissed as “myths” by one campaigner.

Back Heathrow's spring 2025 newsletter
(use this one)
Image:
Back Heathrow’s spring 2025 newsletter

Finlay Asher is an aerospace engineer and co-founder of Safe Landing, a group of aviation workers and enthusiasts seeking climate improvements in the industry.

He said the emissions savings from sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) were “highly debatable” – but added that even if they were taken at face value, use of these fuels is “relatively low” and so only provides small emissions reductions.

“Air traffic growth at Heathrow will wipe this out,” he said.

Mr Asher also disputed the claim that only the cleanest and quietest aircraft will fly at Heathrow. “There is no policy in place which prevents older generation aircraft from being operated out of any airport,” he said.

As for reducing “stacking” – where aircraft wait over an airport to land – Mr Asher said if that’s the goal, “adding more aircraft to the sky won’t make this easier”.

Opposition to Back Heathrow’s claims also came from Rob Barnstone, founder of the No Third Runway Coalition, which is funded by five local authorities surrounding Heathrow Airport.

He said that regardless of fuel efficiencies or new quieter engines, having the additional 260,000 flights Heathrow has said will be created with an extra runway – in addition to the airport’s current cap of 480,000 – would create “an awful lot of noise”.

“For all the best will in the world, Heathrow is a very, very, very noisy neighbour… When you’re adding a quarter of a million additional flights, that’s going to create an awful lot of emissions, even if they’re using planes that are ever so slightly less environmentally damaging than previous planes,” Mr Barnstone said.

Green claims

Under the heading of “UK sustainable fuel industry for Heathrow”, Back Heathrow said “advances in electric and hydrogen powered aircraft can ensure we meet our environmental targets”.

Elaborating on this, Back Heathrow told Sky News: “Zero-emission electric and hydrogen aircraft are very much the end goal for civil aviation and countries like Norway have set 2040 as the year that all of their short-haul flights will be by electric planes.”

The statement was called “incredibly misleading” by Dr Alex Chapman, senior economist at the left-leaning think tank New Economics Foundation (NEF).

“There’s just absolutely no confidence that those aircraft are going to have any meaningful impact on emissions and commercial aviation in any reasonable time frame. And, yeah, we can all speculate as to what may not happen in 50 years’ time. But I think the people living around the airport should be given the information about what’s actually realistic.”

Even if the technology were available, the runway may not be ready for it, Dr Chapman said.

“Perhaps more importantly, there’s been no indication so far that the proposed new runway is being built to cater for those types of aircraft, because a runway that caters to electrical, hydrogen powered aircraft would be very different to one that was for conventional fuel, particularly in terms of the fuelling infrastructure around it that would be required: pipes to pipe hydrogen, massive charging power facilities.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Heathrow CEO on expansion plans

While work is under way to develop electric aircraft, there are currently no commercial electric flights taking place. The best-case scenario is battery-powered flights that may be suitable for short journeys.

But as a major international airport, more than 40% of Heathrow’s flights are long-haul and medium-haul.

And while airlines such as easyJet have called for government funding to develop hydrogen flying suitable for short-haul flights, there are obstacles to making regular commercial flights a reality.

Providing enough hydrogen for the plane journeys from renewable sources will be challenging, as will transporting the fuel, and reworking airport infrastructure for hydrogen refuelling.

Plans for hydrogen aircraft are at least a decade away, with Airbus saying it wants to get a 100-seat hydrogen plane in the air by 2035 – although Back Heathrow’s estimates for a third runway have flights taking off in 2034.

For now, rising emissions from flying are risking the UK’s climate targets, according to the independent government advisers of the Climate Change Committee, who found flights contribute more greenhouse gas than the entire electricity supply sector.

Back Heathrow's spring 2025 newsletter
(use this one)
Image:
Back Heathrow’s spring 2025 newsletter

Expanding at ‘full capacity’

On the first page of the newsletter, Back Heathrow says “Heathrow is at full capacity”, but the company told Sky News the airport has been “operating at 98% capacity since 2005”.

Despite its 98% capacity, Heathrow Airport has broken passenger number records every year for the past 14 years – excluding the pandemic years of 2020 to 2023.

Dr Chapman said Heathrow is at capacity regarding the government-imposed flight cap, not at the capacity of the current runway infrastructure.

“So if the government were, for example, to lift that cap on the number of aircraft movements, it’s pretty likely that they could actually fly 10% to 20% more flights out of the existing infrastructure,” he said.

As aeroplanes have expanded to carry more passengers, the airport has welcomed more people, he added.

The airport earlier this month announced plans to increase its capacity by 10 million passengers a year, before a third runway is built, and to raise the charge paid by passengers to fund the investment.

Read more:
New internet rules come into force – here’s what is changing
Good economic news as sunny weather boosted retail sales

How have the group and the airport responded?

A Heathrow spokesperson said: “Back Heathrow represents tens of thousands of local people who want to make their views known on the importance of Heathrow to their communities and livelihoods today and into the future.

“We have always been clear that, alongside individual residents, local business groups and trade unions, we provide funding for Back Heathrow to provide a voice for local people who historically have not been heard in the debate about expanding Heathrow.”

Speaking for the campaign group, Mr Dhanda said: “At Back Heathrow we are proud of our link to Heathrow Airport (the clue is in the name).

“We have always been open about the fact that we receive support from the airport and that they helped set the organisation up to balance the debate about expansion at a time when the voices of ordinary working people from the diverse communities around Heathrow were not being heard.”

“Back Heathrow also receives support from trade unions, local businesses and residents from amongst the 100,000 registered supporters it now has,” he added.

“We want an end to the dither and delay. Back Heathrow supporters want to see economic growth and the thousands of new jobs and apprenticeships a new runway will create.”

Continue Reading

Trending