Sir Keir Starmer has said questions about his role as the director of public prosecutions (DPP) during the wrongful conviction of Andrew Malkinson should be “directed elsewhere”.
The Labour leader said Mr Malkinson – who spent 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit before having his conviction overturned– had been through a “real ordeal” and that there should be an inquiry to “get to the bottom of that”.
There have been questions regarding Sir Keir’s role as DPP and head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) after it emerged that DNA evidence which exonerated Mr Malkinson came to light in 2007 and was known to all the key agencies, including the CPS, in 2009.
While Labour has said the case never crossed his desk and that Sir Keir had no personal involvement in it, his role as the head of the CPS has come under scrutiny in light of previous statements he has made.
The Labour leader told Sky News in April that he took “full responsibility for every decision of the Crown Prosecution Service when I was director of public prosecutions”.
Asked whether that meant he accepted a role “in the miscarriage of justice” regarding Mr Malkinson, Sir Keir replied: “I’ve seen the statement the Crown Prosecution Service have put out, and so far as I can see, they discharged their obligations by making sure the material in question was given to Mr Malkinson’s lawyers.
“That’s what they should have done. That’s what I understand they did – so I think the questions in this case are actually directed elsewhere.”
Advertisement
Mr Malkinson, 57, was found guilty of raping a woman in Greater Manchester in 2003 and the next year was jailed for life with a minimum term of seven years.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:11
Innocent man locked away for 17 years
He remained in jail for another decade because he maintained his innocence.
Last month he had his conviction quashed by the Court of Appeal after DNA evidence that linked another man to the crime was produced by his defence team.
Case files obtained by Mr Malkinson as he battled to be freed – and seen by Sky News – show officers and prosecutors knew forensic testing in 2007 had identified a searchable male DNA profile on the rape victim’s clothing that did not match his.
Notes of a meeting between the Forensic Science Service, the CPS and Greater Manchester Police (GMP) in December 2009 – a year into Sir Keir’s tenure – suggest the CPS understood the possible importance of the 2007 DNA find.
CPS guidance states it must write to the body responsible for investigating possible miscarriages of justice, the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), “at the earliest opportunity about any case in which there is doubt about the safety of the conviction”.
But the case files show both the police and the CPS chose to take no further action and there is no record the CPS directly informed the CCRC.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:06
Keir Starmer stands by attack ads
The CPS claims Mr Malkinson’s lawyers were informed directly of the new DNA evidence.
The CCRC refused to order further forensic testing or refer the case for appeal in 2012, with the case files citing fears about costs.
Mr Malkinson’s case was described as “astonishing”by former solicitor general Lord Edward Garnier KC, who said there should be an inquiry into the “total public mess” that has unfolded following his exoneration.
Former justice secretary Robert Buckland also told Sky News that “some comment from Sir Keir would be welcome”.
“I would have thought it would be good for Sir Keir as a former senior lawyer to say something about it and to say he will co-operate with any public inquiry,” he said.
A CPS spokesperson said: “It is clear Mr Malkinson was wrongly convicted of this crime and we share the deep regret that this happened.
“Evidence of a new DNA profile found on the victim’s clothing in 2007 was not ignored. It was disclosed to the defence team representing Mr Malkinson for their consideration.
“In addition, searches of the DNA databases were conducted to identify any other possible suspects. At that time there were no matches and therefore no further investigation could be carried out.”
A spokesman said the commission would be as “open as we can be within our statutory constraints” about “lessons to be learned”.
“We recognise that Mr Malkinson has had a very long journey to clear his name and it is plainly wrong that he spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
“We have already been in touch with Greater Manchester Police and with the Crown Prosecution Service to offer our assistance in any of their inquiries.”
The attorney general and the Home Office both declined to comment.
The nine largest US banks restricted financial services to politically contentious industries, including cryptocurrency, between 2020 and 2023, according to the preliminary findings of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
The banking regulator said on Wednesday that its early findings show that major banks “made inappropriate distinctions among customers in the provision of financial services on the basis of their lawful business activities” across the three-year period.
The banks either implemented policies restricting access to banking or required escalated reviews and approvals before giving financial services to certain customers, the OCC said, without giving specific details.
The OCC initiated its review after President Donald Trump signed an executive order in August, directing a review of whether banks had debanked or discriminated against individuals based on their political or religious beliefs.
Crypto issuers and exchanges caught in restrictions
The OCC’s report found that in addition to crypto, the sectors that faced banking restrictions included oil and gas exploration, coal mining, firearms, private prisons, tobacco and e-cigarette manufacturers and adult entertainment.
Banks’ actions toward crypto included restrictions on “issuers, exchanges, or administrators, often attributed to financial crime considerations,” the OCC said.
“It is unfortunate that the nation’s largest banks thought these harmful debanking policies were an appropriate use of their government-granted charter and market power,” said Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould.
“While many of these policies were undertaken in plain sight and even announced publicly, certain banks have continued to insist that they did not engage in debanking,” he added.
The OCC examined JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, US Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank and BMO Bank, the largest national banks it regulates.
The OCC reported that it is continuing its investigation and could refer its findings to the Justice Department.
OCC debanking report leaves “much to be desired”
Nick Anthony, a policy analyst at libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, said in an emailed statement to Cointelegraph that the OCC’s report “leaves much to be desired” and didn’t mention “the most well-known causes of debanking.”
“The report criticizes banks for severing ties with controversial clients, but it fails to mention that regulators explicitly assess banks on their reputation,” he said.
“Making matters worse, the report appears to blame banks for cutting ties with cryptocurrency companies, yet makes no mention of the fact that the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation] explicitly told banks to stay away from these companies,” Anthony added.
Republicans on the House Finance Committee reported earlier this month that the FDIC’s so-called “pause letters” it sent to banks under the Biden administration helped to spur “the debanking of the digital asset ecosystem.”
Caitlin Long, the founder and CEO of the crypto-focused Custodia Bank, said the “worst culprits” of crypto-related debanking under the Biden administration were the FDIC and Federal Reserve, “not OCC.”
“In OCC’s defense, this report covers large banks only. Crushing crypto wasn’t a supervisory priority for large banks like it was for small [and] mid-sized banks,” she added.
Tax changes announced in the budget could have “devastating, unintended consequences” on live music venues, including widespread closures and job losses, trade bodies have warned.
The bodies, representing nearly 1,000 live music venues, including grassroots sites as well as arenas such as the OVO Wembley Arena, The O2, and Co-op Live, are calling for an urgent rethink on the chancellor’s changes to the business rates system.
If not, they warn that hundreds of venues could close, ticket prices could increase, and thousands could lose their jobs across the country.
Business rates, which are a tax on commercial properties in England and Wales, are calculated through a complex formula of the value of the property, assessed by a government agency every three years. That is then combined with a national “multiplier” set by the Treasury, giving a final cash amount.
The chancellor declared in her budget speech that although she is removing the business rates discount for small hospitality businesses, they would benefit from “permanently lower tax rates”. The burden, she said, would instead be shifted onto large companies with big spaces, such as Amazon.
But both small and large companies have seen the assessed values of their properties shoot up, which more than wipes out any discount on the tax rate for small businesses, and will see the bills of arena spaces increase dramatically.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
In the letter, coordinated by Live, the trade bodies write that the effect of Rachel Reeves’s changes are “chilling”, saying: “Hundreds of grassroots music venues will close in the coming years as revaluations drive costs up. This will deprive communities of valuable cultural spaces and limit the UK creative sector’s potential. These venues are where artists like Ed Sheeran began their career.
“Ticket prices for consumers attending arena shows will increase as the dramatic rise in arena’s tax costs will likely trickle through to ticket prices, undermining the government’s own efforts to combat the cost of living crisis. Many of these arenas are seeing 100%+ increases in their business rates liability.
“Smaller arenas in towns and cities across the UK will teeter on the edge of closure, potentially resulting in thousands of jobs losses and hollowing out the cultural spaces that keep places thriving.”
Image: The full letter from trade bodies to the prime minister.
They go on to warn that the government will “undermine its own Industrial Strategy and Creative Sector Plan which committed to reducing barriers to growth for live events”, and will also reduce spending in hotels, bars, restaurants and other high street businesses across the country.
To mitigate the impact of the tax changes, they are calling for an immediate 40% discount on business rates for live venues, in line with film studios, as well as “fundamental reform” to the system used to value commercial properties in the UK, and a “rapid inquiry” into how events spaces are valued.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:38
Sky’s Jess Sharp explains how the budget could impact your money
In response, a Treasury spokesperson told Sky News: “With Covid support ending and valuations rising, some music venues may face higher costs – so we have stepped in to cap bills with a £4.3bn support package and by keeping corporation tax at 25% – the lowest rate in the G7.
“For the music sector, we are also relaxing temporary admission rules to cut the cost of bringing in equipment for gigs, providing 40% orchestra tax relief for live concerts, and investing up to £10m to support venues and live music.”
The warning from the live music industry comes after small retail, hospitality and leisure businesses warned of the potential for widespread closures due to the changes to the business rates system.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:15
Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby challenged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on the tax rises in the budget.
Sky News reported after the budget that the increase in business rates over the next three years following vast increases in the assessed values of commercial properties has left small retail, hospitality and leisure businesses questioning whether their businesses will be viable beyond April next year.
Analysis by UK Hospitality, the trade body that represents hospitality businesses, has found that over the next three years, the average pub will pay an extra £12,900 in business rates, even with the transitional arrangements, while an average hotel will see its bill soar by £205,200.
A Treasury spokesperson said their cap for small businesses will see “a typical independent pub pay around £4,800 less next year than they otherwise would have”.
“This comes on top of cutting licensing costs to help more venues offer pavement drinks and al fresco dining, maintaining our cut to alcohol duty on draught pints, and capping corporation tax,” they added.
The Chancellor Rachel Reeves has acknowledged there were “too many leaks” in the run-up to last month’s budget.
The flow of budget content to news organisations was “very damaging”, Ms Reeves told MPs on the Treasury select committee on Wednesday.
“Leaks are unacceptable. The budget had too much speculation. There were too many leaks, and much of those leaks and speculation were inaccurate, very damaging”, she said.
The cost of UK government borrowing briefly spiked after news reports that income taxes would not rise as first expected and Labour would not break its manifesto pledge.
An inquiry into the leaks from the Treasury to members of the media is to take place. But James Bowler, the Treasury’s top official, who was also giving evidence to MPs, would not say the results of it would be published.
Committee chair Dame Meg Hillier asked if the group of MPs could see the full inquiry.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
“I’d have to engage with the people in the inquiry about the views on that”, replied Mr Bowler, permanent secretary to the Treasury.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:21
OBR leak ‘a mistake of such gravity’
The entire contents of the budget ended up being released 40 minutes early via independent forecasters, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).
A report into this error found the OBR had uploaded documents containing their calculations of budget numbers to a link on the watchdog’s website it had mistakenly believed was inaccessible to the public.
Tax rises ruled out
The chancellor ruled out future revenue-raising measures, including applying capital gains tax to primary residences and changing the state pension triple.
Committee member and former chair Dame Harriet Baldwin had noted that the chancellor’s previous statement to the MPs when she said she would not overhaul council tax and look at road pricing, turned out to be inaccurate.
During the budget, an electric vehicle charge per mile was introduced, as was an additional council tax for those with properties worth £2m or more.