Lee Anderson ducks questions on whether he will join Reform following Tory party suspension
Lee Anderson has dodged questions over whether he could join the Reform party following his suspension from the Conservatives for his attack on Sadiq Khan.
Mr Anderson, the now independent MP for Ashfield, was asked whether he would join the rival party led by Richard Tice but refused to answer.
Instead, all he said to reporters was: “What are you waiting here for?”
Mr Anderson was suspended by Rishi Sunak last weekend after he refused to apologise for claiming in an interview with GB News that “Islamists” had “control” over London and its mayor, Sadiq Khan.
The remarks have been widely condemned from across the political divide, and this morning Home Secretary James Cleverly told the Times that Mr Anderson should apologise directly to Mr Khan for his comments.
Politics latest: Post Office compensation tipped to exceed £1bn
Mr Anderson’s suspension has prompted questions about his future and whether he may join Reform, the party founded by Nigel Farage as an alternative for disaffected Tory voters that is now led by Mr Tice.
In an interview with GB News on Monday night, Mr Anderson did not rule out joining Reform.
“You’ll say Lee Anderson rules out/doesn’t rule out joining the Reform party, so I’m making no comment on my future,” he said on GB News, where he is a paid contributor.
Asked if he would be the Conservative candidate for his seat of Ashfield at the next election, Mr Anderson said: “That’s not up to me”.
However, he said he would still be standing at the next election.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
PM: Anderson comments ‘ill-judged’
In his original interview with GB News last week, Mr Anderson told the channel: “I don’t actually believe that the Islamists have got control of our country, but what I do believe is they’ve got control of Khan and they’ve got control of London.
“He’s actually given our capital city away to his mates.”
In a separate statement published by GB News on Monday, Mr Anderson admitted his words were “clumsy” but that they were “borne out of sheer frustration at what is happening to our beautiful capital city”.
However, he doubled down on his refusal to apologise, saying: “If you are wrong, apologising is not a sign of weakness but a sign of strength.
“But when you think you are right you should never apologise because to do so would be a sign of weakness.”
Rishi Sunak broke his silence to condemn Mr Anderson’s words against Mr Khan on Monday, calling them unacceptable and “wrong”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Khan: ‘Comments are Islamophobic’
The prime minister also rejected suggestions his party had “Islamophobic” tendencies in light of criticism from his own side, including from Tory peer Baroness Warsi who claimed a new generation of Conservatives were “dragging this great party… into the gutter”.
Baroness Warsi said that “not only is there a hierarchy of racism” in the Tory Party today, “anti-Muslim racism is being used as an electoral campaign tool” and that Muslims “don’t matter” and were considered “fair game”.
Speaking to Speaking on BBC Radio York, the prime minister denied the Tory party has “Islamophobic tendencies” and said: “Lee’s comments weren’t acceptable, they were wrong. That’s why he’s had the whip suspended.”
Read more:
Minister calls on Tory MP to withdraw comments about ‘no-go areas’ in Britain
More than 40% of public think Labour still has antisemitism problem
He added: “Words matter, especially in the current environment where tensions are running high. I think it’s incumbent on all of us to choose them carefully.”
However, the prime minister repeatedly refused to call Mr Anderson’s remarks Islamophobic while other ministers have refused to say whether the comments were racist.
Last November Mr Tice denied reports that Mr Anderson was offered money to defect to his party, telling Sky News “no money or cash has been offered to any Tory MP whatsoever”.
Earlier this month Mr Farage, who is now an honorary president at Reform, said he believed it was possible to replace the Conservatives with Reform as he predicted an “extinction event” for the government at the next election.
A group of US Senate Democrats known for supporting the crypto industry have said they would oppose a Republican-led stablecoin bill if it moves forward in its current form.
The move threatens to stall legislation that could establish the first US regulatory framework for stablecoins, according to a May 3 report from Politico.
Per the report, nine Senate Democrats said in a joint statement that the bill “still has numerous issues that must be addressed.” They warned they would not support a procedural vote to advance the legislation unless changes are made.
Among the signatories were Senators Ruben Gallego, Mark Warner, Lisa Blunt Rochester and Andy Kim — all of whom had previously backed the bill when it passed through the Senate Banking Committee in March.
The bill, introduced by Senator Bill Hagerty, is formally known as the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act.
Related: Fed’s Powell reasserts support for stablecoin legislation
Senate prepares to vote on stablecoin bill
The Senate is expected to begin floor consideration of the bill in the coming days, with the first vote potentially taking place next week.
The bill has been championed by the crypto industry as a landmark step toward regulatory clarity. However, the Democrats’ about-face reflects growing unease within the party.
Although revisions were made to the bill after its committee approval to address Democratic concerns, the lawmakers said the changes fell short. They called for stronger safeguards related to Anti-Money Laundering, national security, foreign issuers, and accountability measures for noncompliant actors.
The statement was also signed by Senators Raphael Warnock, Catherine Cortez Masto, Ben Ray Luján, John Hickenlooper and Adam Schiff.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Senator Angela Alsobrooks were absent from the list, who co-sponsored the bill alongside Hagerty.
Despite their objections, the Democratic senators emphasized their commitment to shaping responsible crypto regulation. They reportedly said they “are eager to continue working with our colleagues to address these issues.”
Related: US banks are ‘free to begin supporting Bitcoin’
Crypto needs a stablecoin bill
On April 27, Caitlin Long, founder and CEO of Custodia Bank, criticized the US Federal Reserve for quietly maintaining a key anti-crypto policy that favors big-bank-issued stablecoins, despite relaxing crypto partnership rules for banks.
Long explained that while the Fed recently rescinded four prior crypto guidelines, a Jan. 27, 2023, statement was left intact in coordination with the Biden administration.
The guidance, according to Long, blocks banks from engaging directly with crypto assets and prohibits them from issuing stablecoins on permissionless blockchains.
However, Long noted that once a federal stablecoin bill becomes law, it could override the Fed’s stance. “Congress should hurry up,” she urged.
Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again
Bitcoiners and United States government officials have criticized Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs’s decision to veto a bill that would have allowed the state to hold Bitcoin as part of its official reserves.
“This will age poorly,” Casa co-founder and cypherpunk Jameson Lopp said in a May 3 X post. Bitcoin (BTC) entrepreneur Anthony Pompliano said, “Imagine the ignorance of a politician to believe they can make investment decisions.”
Call for government officials who understand Bitcoin is “the future”
“If she can’t outperform Bitcoin, she must buy it,” Pompliano said. Crypto lawyer Andrew Gordon said, “We need more elected officials who understand that Bitcoin and crypto are the future.”
Wendy Rogers, who co-sponsored the bill with State Representative Jeff Weninger, also voiced her disappointment.
“Politicians don’t understand that Bitcoin doesn’t need Arizona. Arizona needs Bitcoin,” Rogers said.
On May 2, Hobbs vetoed the Arizona Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act, which would have permitted Arizona to invest seized funds into Bitcoin and create a reserve managed by state officials. “Today, I vetoed Senate Bill 1025. The Arizona State Retirement System is one of the strongest in the nation because it makes sound and informed investments,” Hobbs said.
Rogers said she would refile the bill during her next session. Rogers also pointed out that Arizona’s state retirement system already holds stocks of Michael Saylor’s Strategy (MSTR).
“Which is basically a leveraged Bitcoin ETF. Arizona’s Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill will be back. HODL,” Rogers said. The stock price of Strategy rose 32% in April, the most significant monthly gain since November 2024.
Related: US gov’t actions give clue about upcoming crypto regulation
However, well-known crypto skeptic Peter Schiff sided with Hobbs. “The government should not be making decisions to use public funds to speculate in cryptocurrencies,” Schiff said.
Arizona would have become the first US state to establish a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve if it had passed.
Arizona joins several other US states where similar efforts have failed. Similar proposals in Oklahoma, Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming have stalled or been withdrawn recently.
Magazine: Bitcoin to $1M ‘by 2029,’ CIA tips its hat to Bitcoin: Hodler’s Digest, April 27 – May 3
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway