Government accused of U-turn after accepting Russian and Belarusian athletes at Olympics
The UK government has been accused of a U-turn after accepting Russian and Belarusian athletes can compete at the 2024 Olympics.
Last year, Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer said athletes “funded by their states” or “who are in receipt of funding or sponsorship directly aligned to their states” cannot be considered neutral in the context of the invasion of Ukraine.
Britain is part of a coalition of like-minded countries which had called for a ban on such athletes due to this funding.
But the government has now confirmed it agrees with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) that Russian and Belarusian athletes can compete under a neutral banner at the upcoming Paris Games.
Ms Frazer said on Friday those athletes will be taking part under the “strictest neutrality conditions possible”.
Politics latest: Sunak accused of ‘full-on assault on disabled people’
After the position was revealed by The Times earlier this month, there were accusations of a government U-turn on the issue.
Richard Caborn, who was sports minister between 2001 and 2007, said: “This is a humiliating U-turn by Frazer after her forceful speech one year ago to the Council of Europe setting out why Britain should support the total ban of Russian athletes participating in the Paris Olympics.”
In her speech last year, Ms Frazer said the IOC’s recommendations did “not go far enough”, and that a group of more than 30 nations had raised concerns.
Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer. Pic: PA
The government has rejected the suggestion that it changed course following an IOC threat to prevent the UK from hosting Olympic qualifying events.
Ms Frazer said on Friday that she and sports minister Stuart Andrew are “personally committed to supporting Ukraine in the face of Putin’s illegal invasion”.
They said it was for each sporting body, like the IOC, to make their own determinations.
Ms Frazer added: “But our position is clear. Putin’s regime does not deserve to see its athletes line up on the starting blocks of races or stand on podiums during medal ceremonies as representatives of their countries.
“This has never been about punishing individual Russian or Belarusian athletes.
“What we stand against is athletes competing representing the states of Russia and Belarus.
“We continue to vigorously oppose Russian and Belarusian state participation. Our policy has never been a complete and total ban on neutral athletes from Russia and Belarus participating at all.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Inside Paris 2024 preparations
The minister pointed out Russians and Belarusians have been able to compete as neutrals in UK tennis competitions.
She insisted the efforts of the government and coalition have been focused on urging Olympic organisers to “change their approach, apply the strictest neutrality conditions possible and ensure they are implemented rigorously”.
“After two years of concerted lobbying, they have done that. And the result is that the number of athletes from Russia and Belarus expected to participate in the Olympics is in the tens, not hundreds.
“As a result, we have written to the IOC and International Paralympic Committee noting that their final neutrality rules for Paris achieve the widely accepted baseline of ensuring that Russia and Belarus are not represented as states in international sport.”
The IOC expects as many as 54 Russian athletes to compete in Paris.
They will not be able to compete in team disciplines, cannot compete in Russian colours or under the Russian flag and medals will not be included together in a table.
? Click here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts ?
The IOC is leaving it up to the individual sports to make decisions on whether to allow Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete even as neutrals – World Athletics, for instance, has imposed an outright ban.
BIT Mining, previously known as online sports casino 500.com, made around $2.5 million worth of bribes to Japanese officials between 2017 and 2019.
Before US Election Day, Brian Armstrong said Coinbase was “prepared to work” with either a Kamala Harris or Donald Trump administration.
Politics
Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy – as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
Politics latest: No 10 insists chancellor has been ‘straight’ about her CV
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Read more:
Farmers warn of food price hikes due to inheritance tax policy
Minister downplays risk of empty shelves if farmers strike
Welsh farmers carried out a protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales, over the weekend
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
APR and BPR can apply to farmland, which the Conservatives say has been overlooked by the Treasury in compiling its impact figures. File pic: iStock
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports8 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway