Tommy Robinson charged under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act, say Kent police
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, better known as Tommy Robinson, has been charged with failing to provide the pin to his mobile phone under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act, Kent police said.
The charge is in relation to an incident in Folkestone on Sunday 28 July after officers stopped Robinson under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
The PA news agency reports that Robinson has been bailed to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 13 November 2024.
Supporters of Robinson are due to hold a demonstration on Saturday, which is expected to be met with a counter-protest from Stop the War campaigners.
The Metropolitan police and British Transport Police are due to be supported by officers from other forces across the country as the Met said there will be a “significant police presence” to ensure the two groups are kept apart.
Robinson arrived at Folkestone police station shortly after 3pm on Friday.
Key events
Two Scottish pensioners have been given permission to proceed with their legal challenge against the UK and Scottish and governments’ decision to cut the winter fuel payment, reports the PA news agency.
The decision by the court of session means the challenge, brought by Peter and Florence Fanning, of Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, will now proceed to a procedural hearing in December ahead of a full “substantive” hearing in January.
The proceedings were raised with the help of the Govan Law Centre against the Scottish government and the UK work and pensions secretary after the move to end universal entitlement to the payment.
The decision, which was announced by chancellor, Rachel Reeves, following Labour’s election win, led to the Scottish government – which was due to take control over a similar payment through the devolved Social Security Scotland but has since announced a delay – to follow suit.
According to the PA news agency, the case asks the court to rule whether the decision was unlawful, which would then allow the petitioners to ask the court to, in effect, set aside the policy and restore the winter fuel payment to all.
Govan Law Centre said the permission to proceed, which was granted by Lady Hood in Edinburgh on Thursday, means the case has been assessed as having “a real prospect of success” in terms the applicable legislation.
A spokesperson for Govan Law Centre said:
Our clients are delighted that the court has granted permission for their judicial review challenge to proceed to a full hearing in early January.
We await a decision on civil legal aid from the Scottish Legal Aid Board early next week in relation to the proceedings.
If civil legal aid is granted we will then submit an urgent application for sanction for the employment of both junior and senior counsel and will announce our final legal team in early course.”
The case’s argument rests on the accusation that both governments failed to adequately consult with those of pension age on the change and did not release an equality impact assessment on the changes.
The PA news agency reports that a freedom of information request revealed an abridged version of such an assessment had been carried out by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), with the UK government arguing a full study was not required.
The Fannings’ legal action was launched in September with the support of former first minster and Alba party leader Alex Salmond, who died on 12 October.
The UK and Scottish governments were asked for comment by the PA news agency.
The SNP will need to make “uncomfortable commitments” to gain the support of the Scottish Greens for the budget, Lorna Slater has said.
According to the PA news agency, the Greens’ co-leader said her party will require the Scottish government to make promises similar to those made in the Bute House agreement (BHA).
The BHA was struck between the two parties after the 2021 Holyrood election by then first minister Nicola Sturgeon, Slater and her fellow Green co-leader Patrick Harvie. The deal saw Slater and Harvie join the government as ministers as agreement was reached across a raft of progressive policies. Those included commitments on rent controls and reforming the Gender Recognition Act to make it easier for trans people to change their legally recognised sex.
Speaking to the PA news agency on Friday ahead of the Scottish Greens’ conference in Greenock at the weekend, Slater said her party is willing to work with the government on its budget.
“We’re willing to go into negotiations on the budget with an open mind,” she said, adding:
But we need to be clear about what we need to see in that budget, and it’s going to be the same kind of commitments that we saw under the Bute House agreement.”
Slater said she wants to see a “clear focus” on the climate emergency and poverty. “That means the SNP need to commit to doing some things which may be uncomfortable for them,” she said. “Things like putting in place some taxes to support local authorities, things like the cruise ship levy.”
The BHA ended earlier this year and then first minister Humza Yousaf sacked Slater and Harvie from his government in a move which ultimately led to his own resignation.
The SNP failed to return a majority of MSPs in 2021 and relied on the Greens to form a majority. Since the BHA collapsed, the SNP has governed as a minority and it means each vote requires support from one of the opposition parties.
Also speaking on Friday, Harvie said the government must use “every lever possible” to protect public services in the upcoming budget, “including improvements to the tax system”.
The Greens have proposed a number of taxes targeting the wealthy, including on private jets and mansions. Income tax is already higher in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK, with changes made by the Scottish government meaning anyone who earns over £28,000 will begin to pay more tax than those south of the border.
Harvie told the PA news agency:
We’ve made good progress on having a fairer tax system in terms of income so that the wealthiest, the highest earners, are paying their fair share, and people on low and middle incomes are protected.
But we need to broaden that approach and make sure that we’re doing everything possible to protect public services.”
Finance secretary Shona Robison will unveil her budget on 4 December. She has warned finances are tight, having already announced up to £500m worth of cuts to public services in the summer.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver the UK budget on 30 October.
The Scottish government has been approached for comment by the PA news agency.
Gwyn Topham
While the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, grapples with the parlous £40bn funding gap in Britain’s finances, another £25bn of annual revenue is revving up to disappear into the sunset.
As the Treasury knows all too well, turning cars electric will spell the end of that great money-spinner fuel duty. But no one appears ready to grab the wheel and tax motoring in a different way.
Road pricing was the future, once, and Tony Blair, its last champion in Downing Street, is back via his TBI thinktank to push it again. Proponents of road pricing – or metering, charging, pay-per-mile – have traditionally been driven by two impulses: managing road congestion, and raising revenue fairly from motoring. The former most concerned the last Labour government; the latter has become a clear and present danger for the Treasury.
That £25bn from fuel duty, levied on petrol and diesel at the pumps, more or less covers the entire cost of Britain’s road and railway system. Electric cars, which pay zero fuel duty, make up almost a fifth of new registrations.
The TBI is the latest group to weigh in ahead of Reeves’ 30 October budget, urging her to introduce a road charge of 1p per mile for cars and vans, and 2.5p to 4p for lorries and HGVs – “a crucial step in reforming motoring taxation for the electric-vehicle era [and] preventing a growth-stifling rise in congestion”.
It follows the Campaign for Better Transport, which suggests pay-per-mile charges initially for electric vehicles only. A host of other groups, including the RAC, have also declared the need for similar reform. The head of the National Infrastructure Commission, Sir John Armitt, said road pricing was “inevitable”.
But is it? Motorists have got used to being treated with kid gloves come budget time. Since 2010, Conservative chancellors have made great play of freezing fuel duty instead of supposedly scheduled rises – with Rishi Sunak’s temporary 5p cut in 2022 leaving it at 52.9p – to much acclaim from the rightwing press, for whom fuel duty and protecting the interests of the “white-van man” has become a totemic issue.
Inflationary rises – the kind applied to rail fares – would have pushed duty past £1 per litre, netting the exchequer at least £20bn a year more today.
Peter Walker
It is a phrase that crops up 21 times in the Labour manifesto, 12 times in the Conservative manifesto, and has been used in the House of Commons more than 3,500 times in the last decade. So, surely everyone knows what “working people” are – don’t we?
Perhaps not. In the buildup to next week’s budget there has been ever-increasing scrutiny and a parallel lack of clarity about what Labour’s manifesto commitment to not raise taxes on “working people” actually means in practice.
While ministers may want to insist that nothing can be given away in advance of a budget, they have faced inevitable questions about what they would view as a working person, often with mixed results.
Speaking to broadcasters in Samoa, Keir Starmer said he would not use the term for people who had income from assets such as shares or property. “They wouldn’t come within my definition,” he said. Downing Street hastily clarified that the prime minister did not mean people who owned small amounts of, for example, stocks or shares.
There was, inevitably, a long round of questions at the subsequent No 10 media briefing about precisely who did fit the definition. Starmer’s spokesperson set this out as “those who have to rely on their pay packets and do not always have the means to write a cheque, and it is those who are hardest hit by economic instability”.
What the PM had been referring to, she added, was “the broadest sense of who was in his mind’s eye when it comes to the importance of economic stability” – in other words, to an extent a working person is whoever Starmer sees them as being.
Amid this slightly salad-like cascade of words sit two interlocking definitions, the first economic and relatively precise, the other political and notably more woolly.
Former shadow chancellor John McDonnell has written an opinion piece for the Guardian. In it he says that as she delivers her budget, Rachel Reeves must not forget Labour’s historic mission. Here is a snippet:
With the constant drip of stories about possible tax hikes or reinterpretations of the fiscal rules, it’s easy to forget the underlying purpose of any budget. There are two fundamental but straightforward questions to guide a chancellor’s thinking. The first is what society do you want to create? The second is what are the economic measures that will aid its creation?
Labour’s historic mission has been to ensure a good standard of living through decent wages, access to health services and education not dependent on what you could pay, and housing you could afford. But above all else Labour pledged to build a society where poverty would no longer exist by creating a safety net to ensure the most vulnerable, children and unemployed, sick, elderly or disabled people, were no longer at risk.
To achieve all this, the postwar Labour government introduced the most progressive, civilising innovation in our country’s history, the welfare state, funded by a redistributive system of taxation. Any budget under a Labour government since then should be measured on its contribution to achieving this mission.
You can read the full piece here:
Thank you all for your contributions and discussion so far. Comments below the line will close at 3pm today.
Michelle O’Neill has insisted the powersharing structures in Northern Ireland remain stable after several controversies that have hit Sinn Féin, reports the PA news agency.
In an effort to draw a line under a difficult month for her party, the first minister said she has spent four weeks answering questions on the various furores but was now keen to focus on the future for the devolved executive she jointly leads with DUP deputy first minister Emma Little-Pengelly.
“I spent four weeks now answering questions, where I’m focused on now is the business of government,” O’Neill told the BBC. She added:
“Emma and I have a lot of work to get through. We’re determined to continue to lead from the front on all the key issues. That’s the job at hand. That’s the job that I’m committed to as first minister.”
The PA news agency reports that on a visit to the opening of a new Irish language school in Strabane, Co Tyrone, O’Neill insisted that the institutions at Stormont were “stable”.
“Government is stable, the executive is stable,” she said, adding:
We are there to work together. I believe there’s a collective will across the executive to make politics work here. I believe that’s what the public demand and deserve. I’m determined to lead that executive.”
Her comments come a day after the executive office posted a social media video that saw O’Neill and Little-Pengelly speak positively about the potential for the coalition administration.
Sinn Féin has been criticised in recent weeks for its handling of a number of controversies, including that of former press officer Michael McMonagle and ex-senator Niall O Donnghaile.
Aamna Mohdin
Keir Starmer’s refusal to discuss enslavement reparations has only magnified the issue, writes the Guardian’s community affairs correspondent, Aamna Mohdin.
In her analysis piece, Mohdin writes:
The government’s current position puts it out of step with a number of UK institutions, such as the Church of England, the University of Glasgow and Lloyds Bank – as well as the Guardian – who, in recent years, have not only issued formal apologies but announced proposals for reparatory justice.
The insistence on focusing on “current future-facing challenges” such as climate resilience and debt restructuring went down like a lead balloon with legal experts, campaigners and the Caribbean Community (Caricom). Many felt it showed a deep ignorance of what the campaign for reparative justice actually is.
Others bristled at the top-down approach to announce what will and will not be discussed at the meeting – and what they describe as an attempt to shut down meaningful discussions.
The furore displays a gap in race and equality policymaking in No 10, which confirmed in its daily press briefing that Starmer does not have a specific race adviser.
You can read the full piece here:
Conservative former Foreign Office minister Tariq Ahmad acknowledged the “wise words and wisdom” from Jock Stirrup on Ukraine (see 1.34pm BST).
According to the PA news agency, during a House of Lords debate Ahmad said:
A bit of learning here for ministers: listening to the noble and gallant Lord [Stirrup] was something I found extremely beneficial.”
Labour former minister John Spellar, making his maiden speech, said:
I also warn, as Lord Stirrup did, against the complacent view that a deal with Putin that allows him to claim victory will end the war. It may end the battle, it will not end the war and we need absolutely to understand that.”
The PA news agency reports that when opening the debate, defence minister Vernon Coaker, reiterated the UK government’s support for Ukraine as he said Russia’s war represented a “sustained attack” on the United Nations charter and the rules and norms that underpin security and prosperity.
He said:
That is why Russia must lose and be seen to lose because global security is indivisible. What happens in Ukraine has an impact around the world.”
Lord Coaker also told peers:
Regardless of who wins the US election, it is pretty clear a new US president will be looking towards European Nato allies to step up and take greater responsibility for European security.”
‘Dire consequences’ would follow if European leaders lose nerve over Ukraine, says former UK defence chief
A former UK defence chief has warned “dire consequences” would follow if European leaders fail to hold their nerve and continue to support Ukraine, reports the PA news agency.
Jock Stirrup, who served as head of the armed forces between 2006 and 2010, acknowledged there are “signs of growing war weariness” and a desire to end the conflict whatever it takes.
But he said this would be a “disastrous mistake” and make the prospect of a wider war more likely, as he predicted Russian president Vladimir Putin would ultimately ignore any settlement with Ukraine.
Western officials earlier this month said they could not “see any prospect for a negotiation anytime soon” over the war, which has been ongoing since 2014 with Russia launching a full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Speaking during a House of Lords debate, Lord Stirrup said it has been a “difficult” year for Ukraine as weapons and personnel shortages are “hampering” its efforts to deal with the “grinding war of attrition” pursued by Russia.
According to the PA news agency, he told peers:
But we should not assume that all the pressures are on the Ukrainian side. The appearance of North Korean soldiers in the conflict and the widening of the pool of prisoners, which Russia seeks to recruit soldiers from for the frontline underscores the difficulties that Putin is facing.
The FCDO (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) assesses that these difficulties will reach crisis proportions by the end of 2025/beginning of 2026. The question then is how Ukraine is to stay in the fight until then.
But for Ukraine to stay in the fight, Europe and ideally the United States must stay in the fight. In both regions, however, there are signs of growing war weariness and a desire to end the conflict whatever it takes. This would be a disastrous mistake.”
On the “logical consequences” of such a near-term settlement, Stirrup said he presumed an international agreement would be drawn up and signed by both sides.
But the independent crossbench peer warned:
We’ve been there before and we’ve seen only too clearly how little Putin regards or respects such agreements.
The moment he feels they constrain his ambitions, he casts them aside without a second thought. Any piece of paper to which he puts his name would have about as much value as the one Neville Chamberlain waved in front of the cameras at Heston Aerodrome in 1938.”
Stirrup said neither side would be satisfied with an outcome that left the other in control of part of Ukraine, explaining:
Putin would simply pursue his assault on his neighbour by undercover means while the Ukrainians would do the same in an effort to regain their lost territories until open fighting eventually broke out again.”
According to the PA news agency, he went on to express concerns over potential nuclear proliferation and Russia using food as a “political tool” to spread its “malign influence more widely” in Africa.
Stirrup concluded:
I don’t aim to convince the minister or the government, I do not doubt their resolve.
But European leaders need to do a much better job at explaining to their citizens the dire consequences that would attend a failure of nerve over Ukraine.
Negotiating from a position of relative weakness would not bring an end to the conflict, it would carry huge nuclear risks, it would create fissures within western Europe, it will weaken deterrence and it’d make a wider war more rather than less likely.
It will leave our children and grandchildren a fearful legacy for which they would surely and rightly condemn us.”
EU triggers dispute panel in fishing row with UK
Jennifer Rankin
The EU executive has said it has failed to reach agreement with the UK government in a dispute over fishing rights and has triggered an arbitration process under the post-Brexit deal.
The European Commission announced on Friday that it was requesting an arbitration tribunal over the UK’s decision to ban industrial fishing of sandeel in the North Sea.
Rishi Sunak’s government closed the sandeel fishery in March 2024 to protect puffin and kittiwake birds that depend on the small fish for food, as well as restricting harmful bottom trawling that damages fragile sealife on the seafloor. But the EU argues that decision breaches the post-Brexit Trade and Cooperation agreement that gives European fishing boats catch rights in UK waters.
After several months of inconclusive talks to resolve the dispute, the commission said it was moving to the next step in the dispute resolution process.
A commission spokesperson said on Friday:
Since no such mutually agreeable solution was found during the consultations, we are now simply proceeding with the next steps in line with the trade and cooperation agreement to find a solution.”
The EU remained “open to finding a mutually agreeable solution”, the spokesperson added.
Under the TCA, either the EU or UK can request an arbitration panel, which will consist of three members: nominees from both sides and a mutually agreed chair.
The panel should be established within 10 days of any request and is expected to give a binding ruling in around four to five months.
When the previous government confirmed the closure of sandeel fishing at the start of this year, it quoted the head of the RSPB describing the decision as “a vital lifeline from our government for our seabirds when they need it most”.
The commission claims that measures are already in place to protect sandeel in line with scientific advice.
Downing Street to announce new freeports in Budget in revival of Tory policy
Eleni Courea
Downing Street will announce five new freeports in next week’s budget as part of its effort to drive economic growth.
Ministers will set out plans to establish five new low-tax zones, plus an investment zone in the East Midlands, where businesses will benefit from tax breaks such as lower tariffs and customs.
Freeports operated without great impact in the UK between 1984 and 2012, when they were phased out by David Cameron. Rishi Sunak re-established them while he was chancellor to try to offset post-Brexit tariffs and create the conditions for long-term stable investment. Since 2021, eight have been opened in England and two each in Scotland and Wales.
Keir Starmer said the freeports being announced next week would “have this government’s stamp on them” despite being a policy inherited from the Tories.
Read the full story here:
More than 29,000 migrants have arrived in the UK so far this year after crossing the Channel, including 500 in a single day, Home Office figures show.
On Thursday, 509 people made the journey in 11 boats, taking the provisional total for 2024 to date to 29,154.
This is 10% higher than the 26,501 recorded this time last year but 24% lower than the 38,129 people making the journey at this stage in 2022.
No 10 rules out non-financial reparations
On the subject of slavery reparations, Downing Street has said that its position on reparations also covers non-financial reparations.
The prime minister’s deputy spokesperson said:
Our position on reparations is clear, and that goes for other forms of non-financial reparatory justice too.
The prime minister’s focus is on addressing the challenges that we face.
They added the prime minister has “been clear that the issues that have come up the most” at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting are “climate change and also the opportunities presented in terms of trade and growth between this grouping of like-minded nations”.
We have a bit more from No 10 on the confusion over the Labour manifesto’s definition of “working people” who would be protected from tax rises.
Asked whether people with stocks and shares are classed as “working people”, the prime minister’s deputy spokesperson said:
The point that the prime minister was making in his interviews yesterday is that it is those who cannot always write a cheque who are the hardest hit by economic shocks – and that’s why it’s vital that we restore economic stability and that’s what you’ll see set out in terms of the approach at the budget next week.
The spokesperson later added:
He was speaking about who is at the forefront of his mind’s eye in terms of the priorities and the decisions that the government takes when it comes to economic stability.
Kalyeena Makortoff
Rachel Reeves must “get the balance right” when announcing changes to Britain’s debt rules in next week’s budget given the potential knock-on effects to borrowing and mortgage rates, the boss of NatWest has warned.
The bank’s chief executive, Paul Thwaite, said markets would be sensitive to the chancellor’s reasons for releasing up to £50bn of borrowing headroom after she confirmed in Washington on Thursday that she planned to rewrite her fiscal rules.
Thwaite said it was not a surprise that the new Labour government was looking to change the way public debt was measured in order to boost its spending power, noting that the UK had “many different fiscal frameworks in recent years”.
However, he added that the way in which financial markets react to those changes, and the subsequent knock-on effects to borrowing and mortgage rates, will depend on what the government plans to spend that money on.
“The market will take into account, really, what’s trying to be achieved by any change,” Thwaite said after the bank reported its third-quarter results on Friday. “So [they will focus on] what does that mean for spending, what does it mean for investments, what does it mean for tax, rather than the specific rules per se.”
The warning comes two years after the disastrous mini-budget of the then prime minister, Liz Truss, in which announcements over unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy triggered a market meltdown and a surge in borrowing costs that hit homeowners across the country.
Eleni Courea
Businesses that import critical minerals to the UK will be given access to state-backed loans in a move to counter China’s dominance in the market.
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is expected to announce extra government support to encourage the import of critical minerals such as lithium, graphite and cobalt in her budget next week. Companies that bring supplies of critical minerals into the UK will be able to access state-backed loans under the UK export finance mechanism.
Critical minerals are key raw materials for technologies used in the supply of renewable energy and production of electric car batteries. They are also used in the defence and aerospace industries.
The move is intended to make it easier for UK businesses to import critical minerals from Commonwealth countries such as Australia, which has huge deposits of lithium and other raw materials.
Demand for critical minerals is expected to far exceed supply over the next decade. Countries are increasingly reliant on imports from China, which has bought up critical mineral reserves around the world. China controlled 72% of the world’s supply of lithium and 68% of cobalt in 2022, according to figures from the Chatham House thinktank.
The announcement was to be made on the margins of the Commonwealth summit in Samoa. Asked whether western countries should be countering China’s influence in Commonwealth countries in the Indo-Pacific, a UK government spokesperson said it was “an incredibly important strategic area”.
They said:
The Pacific is a crucial area for geopolitics, security and economic interests. By 2050 over half of global growth will come from the wider Indo-Pacific and 60% of global shipping trade already transits in this region.”
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25535557/STK160_X_TWITTER__D.jpg?w=390&resize=390,220&ssl=1 "X raises Premium Plus subscription pricing by almost 40 percent")
