Liz Truss has for the first time acknowledged that “there has been disruption” to the UK economy following last week’s mini budget.
Since the chancellor’s announcement of £45bn in tax cuts the value of the pound has plummeted, nearly half of mortgages have been pulled and the Bank of England launched a £65bn bail-out to save pension funds from collapse.
Asked on Friday whether she accepted this is largely a crisis of her government’s own making, the prime minister said: “It was very, very important that we took urgent steps to deal with the costs that families are facing this winter, putting in place the energy price guarantee for which we’ve had to borrow to cover the cost… but also making sure that we are not raising taxes at a time where there are global economic forces caused by the war in Ukraine that we need to deal with.
“I recognise there has been disruption. But it was really, really important that we were able to get help to families as soon as possible – that help is coming this weekend.
“Because this is going to be a difficult winter and I’m determined to do all I can to help families and help the economy at this time.”
The government’s energy price guarantee comes into force on Saturday.
It means the average household shouldn’t have to pay more than £2,500 a year on their energy bills.
More on Cost Of Living
Related Topics:
Ms Truss defended the decision to present last week’s mini-budget without an accompanying forecast from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) due to the need to respond rapidly to rising energy prices, amid concerns that average annual household bills could soon reach £6,000.
The lack of such a forecast is blamed by many – including Mel Stride MP, the Conservative chair of the treasury select committee – of contributing to the week’s turmoil on the markets.
Advertisement
The OBR said a forecast had been offered to Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng but was not commissioned.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:15
Truss: Right to ‘take decisive action’
On Friday morning, the prime minister and chancellor met the OBR’s budget responsibility committee and afterwards issued a statement saying they “made it clear they value its scrutiny”.
But Ms Truss did not accept that failing to commission a forecast last week had been a mistake.
“It was important we acted quickly, in that timescale there couldn’t be a full OBR forecast. But we are committed to the OBR forecast.
“We are working together with the OBR. There will be an event on 23 November where the policies are fully analysed by the OBR, but it was a real priority to me to make sure we’re working to help struggling families.”
On Thursday, the chancellor committed to maintaining the triple lock on state pensions, which means they would rise in line with inflation (the triple lock means following whichever is higher consumer price inflation, average wage growth or 2.5%).
But the prime minister declined to offer a guarantee that benefits would also rise in line with inflation, despite a pledge from Boris Johnson’s government to do so.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:53
‘People have no faith in govt’
Ms Truss said the issue is “something that the work and pensions secretary is looking at, and she will make an announcement in due course, as is the normal practice for the autumn”.
But the prime minister argued the reversal of the National Insurance hike and support for businesses’ energy bills will help families.
“I had real fears that businesses could go out of business this winter because they were facing unaffordable energy bills,” she added.
“We put in place a business scheme, we put in place support for households across the country. That has cost us money, but it was important we acted quickly.”
With the latest polls putting Labour more than 30 points ahead of the Conservatives, many backbenchers are concerned about the prospect of losing their seats at the next election.
Senior MP Charles Walker said on Friday the conversation is no longer about winning, but how much the party loses by.
But the prime minister declined to comment on whether her party is heading towards electoral defeat, responding that “100% of her focus” is on supporting “the British public and British businesses through this difficult winter”.
A woman who accused Conor McGregor of raping her has said “justice has been served” after she won her civil case against the Irish mixed martial arts fighter.
Nikita Hand has been awarded €248,603 (£206,000) in damages after a jury at Dublin’s High Court found McGregor assaulted her in a Dublin hotel in 2018.
McGregor, 36, made no comment as he swiftly left court following the decision on Friday evening.
He had previously told the court he had consensual sex with Ms Hand in a penthouse at the Beacon Hotel in December 2018.
Speaking outside court after the decision, an emotional Ms Hand said the weeks of her civil case against the fighter have been a “nightmare” and has impacted not only her life but her daughter’s, friends and loved ones.
“I would like to start off by saying I’m overwhelmed and touched by the support I have received from everybody,” the mother-of-one said.
“It’s something that I’ll never forget for the rest of my life.
“Now that justice has been served, I can now try and move on and look forward to the future with my family and friends and daughter.”
Addressing other victims of sexual assault, Ms Hand continued: “I hope my story is a reminder that no matter how afraid you might be: Speak up, you have a voice and keep on fighting for justice.
“You can stand up for yourself if something happens to you – no matter who the person is – and justice will be served.”
Ms Hand told the court McGregor pinned her to a bed, choked her three times and “brutally raped and battered” her.
The civil court jury was told she was left with extensive injuries, including purple and blue bruising along her hands and wrists, a bloodied scratch to her breast and tenderness to her neck.
But lawyers for the fighter contested the lawsuit and accused her of attempted “extortion”.
They pointed to CCTV footage of Ms Hand arriving at and leaving the hotel with McGregor and a second man, James Lawrence, whom she also accused of sexual assault.
Both McGregor and Lawrence denied any wrongdoing. While Ms Hand won her case against McGregor, she lost her claim against Lawrence.
On Monday, McGregor’s legal team told jurors it did not matter if they did not like or even loathed the famous fighter, urging them to look at the evidence and not his character.
McGregor and Ms Hand knew each other and had occasionally been in contact on social media, the civil trial heard.
Before the assault, Ms Hand had contacted the fighter, who picked up her and a friend in his car.
McGregor “came on to her”, but she did not want to have sexual intercourse with him as she was on her period, the court heard.
Arrest warrants have been issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former defence secretary Yoav Gallant and a senior Hamas commander by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The warrants against the senior Israeli figures are for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the war in Gaza that Israel launched following the 7 October attacks by Hamas.
The prime minister’s office said the warrants against him and Gallant were “anti-semitic” and said Israel “rejects with disgust the absurd and false actions”.
Another warrant was issued for the arrest of Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al Masrifor alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Neither Israel nor the US are members of the ICC. Israel has rejected the court’s jurisdiction and denies committing war crimes in Gaza.
US President Joe Biden described the warrants against Israeli leaders as “outrageous”, adding “whatever the ICC might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas”.
Former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett said the warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant were a “mark of shame” for the ICC.
The court originally said it was seeking arrest warrants for the three men in May for the alleged crimes and today announced that it had rejected challenges by Israel and issued warrants of arrest.
In its update, the ICC said it found “reasonable grounds to believe” that Netanyahu and Gallant “bear criminal responsibility” for alleged crimes.
These, the court said, include “the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts”.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews said the ICC’s decision sent a “terrible message”.
“The court has minimised how Hamas fights – deliberately from within civilian infrastructure and cruelly using Palestinian civilians as human shields, tragically leading to many casualties,” the board said.
“Democratic governments, and people around the world, should consider how they would have responded to an October 7th perpetrated against their country, involving mass murder, rape, and hostage-taking.
“We should all be focused on defeating the Hamas terrorists, liberating the hostages, ensuring that civilians in Gaza receive all necessary aid and working towards a sustainable peace for Israelis and Palestinians to prevent these horrible conflicts in the future.
“The decision of the ICC is counter-productive in all these respects.”
Three arrest warrants have been issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) but the two most significant are those against Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant.
The court in their statement said that they have reasonable grounds to believe that those two men, have been carrying out the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts.
Ever since the arrest warrants were first sought there have been a lot of legal challenges. But the court has rejected all that and has now issued these arrest warrants.
So what does it mean? Well, practically, it would mean that Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant couldn’t travel to any state that is a signatory of the ICC – about 120 countries around the world, including the UK and many European countries.
Were Netanyahu to travel to any of those countries, he should be arrested by the police forces of those countries. And it’ll be very interesting to see what Sir Keir Starmer’s reaction is to this.
But the US, Israel’s closest ally, is not a signatory of the ICC. I think Netanyahu will have support on the other side of the Atlantic.
Also, these ICC arrest warrants don’t always get carried out. We saw President Vladimir Putin, who had an arrest warrant issued for him after the invasion of Ukraine, travel to Mongolia a couple of months ago and nothing was done about that.
But in terms of the reputations of Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, in terms of that legacy, they are now wanted suspects, wanted to be put on trial for war crimes. And it is a label that will never leave them.
Warrant for Hamas leader
The ICC also said it has issued an arrest warrant for Hamas leader Al Masri, saying it has “reasonable grounds to believe” that he is responsible for crimes against humanity including murder, extermination, torture, rape, as well as war crimes including taking hostages.
Discussing the 7 October attacks, the court said: “In light of the coordinated killings of members of civilians at several separate locations, the Chamber also found that the conduct took place as part of a mass killing of members of the civilian population, and it therefore concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of extermination was committed.”
In its statement, the ICC said the prosecution was not in a position to determine whether Al Masri is dead or alive, so was issuing the arrest warrant.
The court previously said it was seeking an arrest warrant for Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas who was subsequently killed in July.
The home secretary has refused to say if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be arrested if he landed on British soil after an international arrest warrant was issued for him.
On Thursday, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Israeli defence secretary Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the war in Gaza.
But Yvette Cooper said the ICC, which the UK is a member of, is independent and while the government respects that, it “wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment” on the processes involved.
She told Sky News: “We’ve always respected the importance of international law, but in the majority of the cases that they pursue, they don’t become part of the British legal process.
“What I can say is that obviously, the UK government’s position remains that we believe the focus should be on getting a ceasefire in Gaza.”
However, Emily Thornberry, Labour chair of the foreign affairs committee in parliament, told Sky News: “If Netanyahu comes to Britain, our obligation under the Rome Convention would be to arrest him under the warrant from the ICC.
“Not really a question of should, we are required to because we are members of the ICC.”
An ICC arrest warrant was also issued for Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al Masri, the mastermind behind the 7 October attacks in Israel, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Advertisement
Israel claims Al Masri was killed earlier this year but the ICC said that has not been confirmed, so it was issuing the arrest warrant.
Netanyahu’s office said the warrants against him and Gallant were “anti-semitic” and said Israel “rejects with disgust the absurd and false actions”.
Neither Israel nor the US are members of the ICC. Israel has rejected the court’s jurisdiction and denies committing war crimes in Gaza.
US President Joe Biden described the warrants against Israeli leaders as “outrageous”, adding: “Whatever the ICC might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas.”
Former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett said the warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant were a “mark of shame” for the ICC.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews said the ICC’s decision sent a “terrible message”.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Friday he would invite Netanyahu to visit Hungary and he would guarantee the arrest warrant would “not be observed”.
However, both France and Italy signalled they would arrest Netanyahu if he came to their countries.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:52
Why have arrest warrants been issued?
The ICC originally said it was seeking arrest warrants for the three men in May for the alleged crimes and on Thursday announced that it had rejected challenges by Israel and issued warrants of arrest.
In its update, the ICC said it found “reasonable grounds to believe” that Netanyahu and Gallant “bear criminal responsibility” for alleged crimes.
These, the court said, include “the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts”.
It is the first time a sitting leader of a major Western ally has been accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity by a global court of justice.