Connect with us

Published

on

More than £117m of taxpayers’ money will be spent to protect mosques, Muslim faith schools and community centres from hate attacks, the government has announced.

Home Secretary James Cleverly said the money, which will be spent over the next four years on measures including CCTV cameras, alarms and fencing, would give “reassurance and confidence to UK Muslims”.

The announcement follows a £70m package for Jewish groups and comes in response to concerns the Israel-Hamas war is fuelling division in the UK.

Politics latest: Gay Tory minister Mike Freer: ‘When I see ‘Queers for Palestine’, I say, on what planet?’

Mr Cleverly said: “Anti-Muslim hatred has absolutely no place in our society.

“We will not let events in the Middle East be used as an excuse to justify abuse against British Muslims.

“The prime minister has made clear that we stand with Muslims in the UK.

More on James Cleverly

“That is exactly why we have committed to this funding, giving reassurance and confidence to UK Muslims at a time when it is crucially needed.”

The funding forms part of a package of support to provide reassurance that anti-Muslim abuse, threats or harassment or any form of hate crime will not be tolerated.

The £117m over the next four years follows £29.4m available for 2023-24, which included £4.9m allocated following the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel, which triggered the latest conflict in Gaza.

The announcement, which comes at the start of Ramadan, will cover community sites across the UK.

The funding package is larger than that given to the Community Security Trust to cover Jewish facilities because of the higher Muslim population and a larger number of sites to cover.

Read more from Sky News:
Boris Johnson flew to Venezuela for secret talks – and texted Cameron en route
Labour says it will not bail out bankrupt councils
Scrapping non-dom tax status ‘utter humiliation’ for government, Labour claims

? Listen above then tap here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts ?

Security minister Tom Tugendhat said: “This funding demonstrates that this government stands firmly against hate crimes, abuse, threats or harassment against British Muslims.

“We continue to work closely with policing and community partners to ensure the safety and security of British Muslims.”

It comes as the government prepares to publish a revised definition of extremist groups.

But Health Secretary Victoria Atkins failed to name which groups or individuals would fall under the revised definition when she was interviewed on Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips.

Continue Reading

Politics

MPs waver once again as ’emotive’ assisted dying bill heads back to the Commons

Published

on

By

MPs waver once again as 'emotive' assisted dying bill heads back to the Commons

Further moves to amend the controversial assisted dying bill are being made by MPs as it returns to the Commons for another day of emotionally charged debate.

After a marathon committee stage, when more than 500 amendments were debated, of which a third were agreed, the bill returns to the Commons with 130 amendments tabled.

As a result, the final and decisive votes on whether the bill clears the Commons and heads to the House of Lords are not expected until a further debate on 13 June.

The bill proposes allowing terminally ill adults with less than six months to live to receive medical assistance to die, with approval from two doctors and an expert panel.

Why is assisted dying so controversial – and where is it already legal?

In a historic vote last November, after impassioned arguments on both sides, MPs voted 330 to 275 in favour of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.

Sir Keir Starmer voted in favour, while Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood voted against.

More on Assisted Dying

The Conservatives were also split, with leader Kemi Badenoch voting in favour and former PM Rishi Sunak against. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage also voted against the bill.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Assisted dying: Care sector ‘not being heard’

The PM, who is attending a summit in Albania, will be absent this time, but asked for his current opinion, told reporters: “My views have been consistent throughout.”

No fewer than 44 of the new amendments have been tabled by Ms Leadbeater herself, with government backing, a move that has been criticised by opponents of the bill.

Opponents also claim some wavering MPs are preparing to switch from voting in favour or abstaining to voting against and it only needs 28 supporters to change their mind to kill the bill.

Confirmed switchers from voting in favour to against include Tory MPs George Freeman and Andrew Snowden, Reform UK chief whip Lee Anderson and ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe.

Labour MP Debbie Abrahams and Tory MP Charlie Dewhirst, who abstained previously, are now against and Labour’s Karl Turner, who voted in favour at second reading, is now abstaining.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Assisted Dying Bill criticised

Mr Turner, a former barrister, told Sky News that an amendment to replace a high court judge with a panel of experts “weakens the bill” by removing judicial safeguards.

But in a boost for the bill’s supporters, Reform UK’s Runcorn and Helsby by-election winner Sarah Pochin, a former magistrate, announced she would vote in favour. Her predecessor, Labour’s Mike Amesbury, voted against.

“There are enough checks and balances in place within the legislation – with a panel of experts assessing each application to have an assisted death, made up of a senior lawyer, psychiatrist, and social worker,” said Ms Pochin, who is now the only Reform UK MP supporting the bill.

A Labour MP, Jack Abbott, who voted against in November, told Sky News he was now “more than likely” to vote for the bill, which was now in a much stronger position, he said.

Ms Leadbeater’s supporters strongly deny that the bill is at risk of collapse and are accusing its opponents of “unsubstantiated claims” and of “scare stories” that misrepresent what the bill proposes.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Two people given months to live debate assisted dying

“There is a pretty transparent attempt by opponents of the bill to try to convince MPs that there’s a big shift away from support when that simply isn’t true,” an ally of Ms Leadbeater told Sky News.

Speaking in an LBC radio phone-in on the eve of the debate on the amendments, Ms Leadbeater said she understood her bill was “an emotive issue” and there was “a lot of passion about this subject”.

But she said: “I would be prepared to be involved in a compassionate end to someone’s life if that was of their choosing. And it’s always about choice. I have friends and family who are very clear that they would want this option for themselves.

“There is overwhelming public support for a change in the law and literally everywhere I go people will stop me and say thank you for putting this forward. I would want this choice.”

Read more:
Ukrainian man charged over fires at properties and car linked to PM
An embarrassment for Starmer on migrant return hubs?

Also ahead of the debate, health minister Stephen Kinnock and justice minister Sarah Sackman wrote to all MPs defending the government’s involvement in Ms Leadbeater’s amendments to her bill.

“The government remains neutral on the passage of the bill and on the principle of assisted dying, which we have always been clear is a decision for parliament,” they wrote.

“Government has a responsibility to ensure any legislation that passes through parliament is workable, effective and enforceable.

“As such, we have provided technical, drafting support to enable the sponsor to table amendments throughout the bill’s passage. We have advised the sponsor on amendments which we deem essential or highly likely to contribute to the workability of the bill.”

Continue Reading

Politics

MPs on farming committee call on Rachel Reeves to delay family farm tax

Published

on

By

MPs on farming committee call on Rachel Reeves to delay family farm tax

The UK’s food security and the future of farming lies in Rachel Reeves’ hands, a leading MP has said as a committee called on the government to delay farm inheritance tax changes.

The environment, food and rural affairs (EFRA) committee has released a report calling on the government to delay the reforms for a year until April 2027.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced in the October budget farmers would no longer be allowed to claim inheritance tax relief for farms worth more than £1m from April 2026.

The move prompted multiple protests in Westminster by farmers who said it will threaten the future of thousands of multi-generational family farms.

The EFRA committee, made up of seven Labour MPs and four Lib Dem and Tory MPs, said a pause in the implementation would “allow for better formulation of tax policy and provide the government with an opportunity to convey a positive long-term vision for farming”.

A delay would also protect vulnerable farmers who would have “more time to seek appropriate professional advice”, the MPs said.

farmers protest in central london over inheritance tax - SN screengrab
Image:
There have been multiple protests

The MPs raised concerns the change was announced “without adequate consultation, impact assessment or affordability assessment”, leaving the impact on farms and food security “disputed and unclear”.

More on Inheritance Tax

They said it risks producing “unintended consequences” and threaten to “affect the most vulnerable”.

The MPs have called on the government to consider alternative reforms.

Read more:
Food prices could rise due to inheritance tax rise

Typical family farm ‘would have to spend 159% of its profits for a decade to pay’ tax

Chair of the EFRA Committee Alistair Carmichael said the government should pause and reconsider the farmers' inheritance tax changes
Image:
Chair of the EFRA Committee Alistair Carmichael said the government should pause and reconsider the farmers’ inheritance tax changes

Alistair Carmichael, the Lib Dem chair of the committee, told Sky News: “There is a need for inheritance tax to be reformed.

“The use of land purchase by the super rich as a means of sheltering their wealth is something which is not in the public interest or farmers.

“But this is not the way to go about reform.

“The risk is you see farmers selling out, they will sell out to people who are not going to use land for food production then we risk losing food security – we’ve seen how foolish relying on exports is after Putin’s invasion.”

Jeremy Clarkson arrives in central London to join the farmers protest over the changes to inheritance tax (IHT) rules in the recent budget with introduce new taxes on farms worth more than ..1 million. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. Farmers have reacted over the inheritance tax changes for farming businesses, which limit the 100% relief for farms to only the first ..1 million of combined agricultural and business property. For anything above that, landowners will pay a 20% tax rate, rather than the standard 40% rate of inheritance tax (IHT) applied to other land and property. PA Photo. Photo credit should read: Aaron Chown/PA Wire
Image:
Celebrities such as Jeremy Clarkson have drawn attention to the outrage

He added “as an outsider looking in”, the way in which the Treasury handled the inheritance tax announcement, after Labour said in opposition they would not change it, “has created a real problem of political authority” for Environment Secretary Steve Reed.

“It’s a problem the Treasury themselves can solve,” he said.

“Their own backbenchers increasingly think they should solve this and our report today gives them an opportunity to do that if they choose to take it.

“It really is up to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is over to her now.”

The committee report says before the autumn budget 70% of farmers felt optimistic about their futures, but that fell to 12% after the budget.

The survey, by the Farmers Guardian in March, also found 84% of farmers felt their mental health has been affected by the announcement.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Key points from the budget

Farmers said the government announcing the closure of applications to this year’s sustainable farming incentive with just hours to go, was also a cause.

The committee said there are other ways to achieve reform, and called on the government to publish its evaluation and rationale for not following alternative policy measures.

They also said the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has a pattern of “poor communication and last-minute decision-making following rumours and departmental leaks”.

Continue Reading

Politics

Tornado Cash dev Roman Storm trial goes ahead with slight trim

Published

on

By

Tornado Cash dev Roman Storm trial goes ahead with slight trim

Tornado Cash dev Roman Storm trial goes ahead with slight trim

US federal prosecutors are pressing ahead with their case against Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm, but will drop a small part of their indictment after the Department of Justice rolled back its crypto enforcement last month.

Jay Clayton, the acting US Attorney for Manhattan, told federal court judge Katherine Polk Failla in a May 15 letter that the charges against Storm still stand, bar one part of a conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business charge.

“After review of this case, this Office and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General have determined that this prosecution is consistent with the letter and spirit of the April 7, 2025 Memorandum from the Deputy Attorney General,” Clayton wrote.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s April memo said the Justice Department would end the so-called “regulation by prosecution” of crypto, and added that the agency wouldn’t prosecute crypto mixers like Tornado Cash “for the acts of their end users or unwitting violations of regulations.”

Tornado Cash dev Roman Storm trial goes ahead with slight trim
A highlighted excerpt of Blanche’s memo stating that the Department of Justice was rolling back its crypto enforcement. Source: US Department of Justice

Clayton added that the indictment against Storm will cut the accusation that he failed to comply with money transmitting business registration requirements.

Prosecutors were pursuing that charge as part of their allegation that Storm conspired to run Tornado Cash as an unlicensed money transmitter.

The government will still push ahead with the charge under the accusation that Storm transmitted funds while knowing they were derived from a criminal offence or were intended to support unlawful activity. 

The Justice Department alleged that Tornado Cash helped launder over $1 billion worth of crypto, including for the sanctioned North Korean state-backed hacking collective the Lazarus Group.

Clayton said the Justice Department will also still pursue the other two charges in its indictment, one count of money laundering conspiracy and one count of conspiracy to violate US sanctions.

Related: NFT founder stole millions from Bitcoin project, investors allege 

The money laundering and sanctions violations conspiracy charges each carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, while the unlicensed money transmitter conspiracy charge carries a maximum sentence of five years.

Storm has pleaded not guilty, and his trial is scheduled for July 14. He was charged alongside fellow founder Roman Semenov, who is at large and believed to be in his native Russia.

Blanche memo cited in bids to toss

Other crypto executives facing charges have pointed to Blanche’s memo in a bid to have their cases dismissed.

Crypto mixer Samourai Wallet co-founders Keonne Rodriguez and William Hill had pointed to the memo to try to dismiss their charges of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitter and money laundering conspiracy.

Braden John Karony, the CEO of crypto firm SafeMoon, has also cited the memo in an attempt to have the charges of securities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy against him dismissed.

Legal Panel: XRP win leaves Ripple a ‘bad actor’ with no crypto legal precedent set 

Continue Reading

Trending