Rishi Sunak criticised during public Q&A as voters express scepticism about antisocial behaviour crackdown – UK politics live

Read More

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, has described Rishi Sunak’s anti-social behaviour action plan as “too weak, too little and too late’. In a statement, she said:

Over the last 13 years the Conservatives have decimated neighbourhood policing and youth services and weakened antisocial behaviour powers so they are barely used.

There are still 10,000 fewer neighbourhood police and PCSOs on our streets than there were 7 years ago.

A few hotspot pilots is nowhere near enough to turn that around. We need guaranteed neighbourhood patrols and action in all areas or this is just yet more empty rhetoric.

Labour will put 13,000 more neighbourhood police and PCSOs back on the beat to keep our communities safe.

But Cooper also said that Labour would support the ban on laughing gas – even though this is one of the aspects of the plan that has attracted most criticism, because it runs counter to the advice of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. In an interview on BBC News, when it was put to her that there was no evidence to support a ban, Cooper said there was some “early evidence” to suggest laughing gas did cause harm. She also said it was linked to anti-social behaviour.

Chris Philp, the policing minister, said almost exactly the same when he was asked to defend the ban. (See 12.26pm.)

My colleague Severin Carrell is at Murrayfield, where the winner of the SNP leadership contest will be announced at 2pm.

At 3.30pm there will be an urgent question in the Commons about the oil spillage in Poole harbour. After that, at around 4.15pm, Suella Braverman, the home secretary, will make a statement about the antisocial behaviour action plan. The debate on the illegal migration bill will not start until after 5pm.

Downing Street has said there is no need to change the rules governing what second jobs MPs are allowed to do despite the revelation that two former Tory cabinet ministers, Matt Hancock and Kwasi Kwarteng, agreed to work for ?10,000 a day on behalf of a South Korean firm.

The firm was fake, and Hancock and Kwarteng were two of several Tories duped by an undercover sting operation carried out by the Led By Donkeys campaign group. The MPs did not break, or offer to break, House of Commons rules, but the investigation revived concerns that some MPs are unduly focused on work not relevant to their parliamentary duties.

At the morning lobby briefing, asked if Rishi Sunak was content with the current rules, the PM’s spokesperson replied:

The prime minister thinks that an MP’s primary job is and must be to support their constituents and represent their interests in parliament. That is why we agreed with the recommendation made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life in 2018 that members should be banned from accepting any paid work to provide services as a parliamentary strategist, adviser or consultant and why we brought forward an amendment to support the introduction of limits on members undertaking outside work.

It is right that MPs’ financial interests are transparently and publicly declared online … MPs having second jobs can contribute to their work in parliament, so we think this strikes the right balance.

In November 2021 Boris Johnson, the then PM, proposed putting “reasonable limits” on what MPs could earn from a second job. That proposal was subsequently abandoned.

Here is the Observer’s story about the Led By Donkeys sting.

At the weekend the Sunday Telegraph reported that ministers were preparing to accept a proposal from Tory MPs to amend the illegal migration bill to include provision for a new safe route for up to 20,000 asylum seekers a year to come to the UK.

Some Conservative MPs want to amend the bill to toughen the provisions enabling the government to ban people from claiming asylum in the UK if they have arrived in the country illegally, and to deport those people swiftly.

But other Tories, led by the former children’s minister Tim Loughton, want to make the bill less hostile to refugees by amending it so that it includes a new safe and legal route for asylum seekers wanting to come to the UK.

The Sunday Telegraph claimed ministers were preparing to accept the plan rather than risk defeat in a vote on the amendment.

But at the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson dismissed this report saying that, although the government was in favour of more safe and legal routes, it wanted to tackle illegal migration first. The spokesperson said:

It is true that we do want to create more safe and legal routes but the view remains that in order to do that we first need to get a grip on those crossing illegally so we can plan and make a proper decision about the numbers of people the country, local authorities, councils, GPs, are able to deal with each year.

We think that is something parliament should have a say on. We think that is an important democratic principle.

The spokesperson also rejected claims that Suella Braverman, the home secretary, was a “sock puppet” for Tory rightwingers wanting an even harder line on immigration. “Both the prime minister and the home secretary have been clear that this bill will comply with international law and stop the boats,” the spokesperson said.

There is a “significant gap” between what the UK needs in terms of new infrastructure and what the government is delivering, the National Infrastructure Commission says.

In a foreword to its 2023 progress review, Sir John Armitt, the commission’s chair, says:

If the commission saw 2021 as a year of slow progress in many areas, in 2022 movement has stuttered further just as the need for acceleration has heightened. There have been negligible advances in improving the energy efficiency of UK homes, the installation of low carbon heating solutions or securing a sustainable balance of water supply and demand.

The risk of a mixed scorecard is that readers take their pick based on their own experiences or purposes. Residents in the north of England, for instance, could hardly be blamed for focusing on the appalling state of current rail services within and between the places pivotal to supporting growth. Others will cheer the further expansion of cheap renewable energy generation at a time of severe concerns about energy security and the high costs of fossil fuels.

But taking a strategic view on the recent pace of planning and delivery suggests a significant gap between long-term ambition and current performance. To get back on track we need a change of gear in infrastructure policy.

The commission was set up to advise the government on infrastructure policy.

Rishi Sunak was relucant to explain why the government was banning laughing gas (nitrous oxide) despite the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs saying a ban would be disproportionate (see 11.50am), but in interviews this morning Chris Philp, the policing minister, was more forthcoming. He said:

There is some emerging evidence of physical medical harm. There have been some reports recently of paralysis being caused by large-scale use.

And of course it does fuel this anti-social behaviour problem where people, typically younger people, congregate, sometimes in large groups, and consume nitrous oxide and then discard the canisters which sometimes adds to a sense of menace or unease for other members of the public who may be using a park or some public place.

In its report the advisory council said “current evidence suggests that the health and social harms are not commensurate with control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971”.

Voting has closed in the race for the SNP leadership, with Nicola Sturgeon’s replacement to be announced within the next two hours, PA Media reports. PA says:

Health secretary Humza Yousaf, finance secretary Kate Forbes and former community safety minister Ash Regan have taken part in about 16 hustings as they vied for the top job.

The first minister announced in February that she would resign after more than eight years in the job once her successor had been chosen.

SNP members had until noon on Monday to cast their ballots.

The fate of the three candidates is set to be revealed at about 2pm on Monday at the BT Murrayfield stadium in Edinburgh.

A vote in Holyrood will follow on Tuesday to select the next first minister.

Here are the main points from Rishi Sunak’s speech and Q&A in Essex. Unusually, this was one of those events where the questions were probably more newsworthy than the answers. In the past Sunak has always received a positive and generally respectful reception when taking questions from members of the public at his PM Connect events. Yet today the people who were there sounded sceptical and underwhelmed when Sunak set out the details of his antisocial behaviour action plan.

It was by no means a disaster, and there was no evidence of personal hostility towards Sunak. But if the strategists in No 10 believe that announcements like this are going to win them much credit with the electorate, they are probably mistaken. (It is also worth noting that the Daily Mail, probably the most influential of the pro-Tory papers, put the Sunak crackdown on pages 6 and 7 today, despite No 10 providing an article by Sunak to go with it; it splashed instead on a story critical of the government’s record on crime.)

Sunak faced criticism during a public Q&A as voters expressed scepticism about his new crackdown on antisocial behaviour. The very first question came from a member of the public who told Sunak about his experience trying to report shoplifters using the non-emergency number for the police. He asked the PM:

Have you ever tried that non-emergency phone number? It’s the most frustrating thing in the world.

A second questioner said he had lived in Chelmsford his whole life and felt crime was getting worse. He was not impressed by the announcement today that laughing gas is being banned. He said:

I think the Conservatives have dropped the ball a little bit, to be honest. I know it’s all good talking about laughing gas, but that is the least of your problems.

He said he had seen people dealing drugs near his allotment, and using heroin, but nothing seemed to happen when he reported this.

We reported this and nothing happens. As the gentleman said earlier, you don’t know whether it goes into the system or not.

A third member of the audience interrupted while Sunak was taking media questions and asked why there were not more police officers on the streets. “Surely we could get a little bit more presence on the street,” he said.

Sunak ducked a question about why he was ignoring advice from experts saying banning laughing gas could have “significant unintended consequences”. In a recent report, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs said banning nitrous oxide as the government is proposing (it will still be available for legitimate use in healthcare and catering) would “would be disproportionate for the level of harm associated with nitrous oxide and could have significant unintended consequences”. Asked why he was ignoring this, Sunak did not engage with the argument but instead depicted this first as a litter problem. He said:

I think, quite frankly, I and almost everyone else is just sick of having to deal with nitrous oxides canisters when they’re walking through their communities. It’s about being in your community, being in your park, being on the high street of the town centre, and not having to see these things strewn around.

But Sunak also said he favoured a zero-tolerance approach to drugs.

Sunak sidestepped a question about whether Suella Braverman is seen by No 10 as a “sock puppet” for Tory MPs who want to harden the illegal migration bill. When this claim was put to him (see 10.27am), Sunak ignored the specific question, but praised Braverman’s contribution generally. He also stressed the government would abide by its international obligations.

The home secretary has done a superb job. The home secretary and I have worked incredibly closely for the last few months, since we’ve had this job, to get the legislation exactly right. It’s not easy. We need something that is going to be robust, that’s going to be effective, and that’s what we’ve got.

It’s important that it’s effective, which it will be, and it’s also important that we abide by our international obligations. This is a country and a government that does follow the law. Of course that’s important.

Braverman is thought to agree with Tory hardliners who want the government to deal with the small boats problem by withdrawing from the European convention on human rights. Sunak does not support that, and claims it will not be necessary.

Rishi Sunak’s illegal migration bill would add to the “significant regression” of human rights protection for refugees, asylum seekers and migrants in the UK, the lead official in charge of human rights at the Council of Europe has said.

In a damning verdict on the government’s proposals, the commissioner for human rights, Dunja Mijatovi?, said people must be able to claim asylum and have a fair assessment, regardless of how they arrived in the UK.

The bill proposes to detain and deport people who arrive in the UK on small boats or in the back of lorries, depriving adults of the chance to claim asylum even if they were fleeing war or persecution.

Mijatovi? wrote:

By effectively preventing people arriving irregularly from having their asylum claims assessed, the bill would strip away one of the essential building blocks of the protection system.

She added that “numerous other measures” gave cause for concern, saying there was no guarantee that other provisions on removing people were in line with the European convention on human rights, including the prohibitions on exposing people to a violation of their right to life, or freedom from torture or degrading treatment.

The concerns were raised in a letter to the Commons speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, and his counterpart in the Lords, Lord McFall of Alcluith, as she urged parliamentarians to block a bill she said was “incompatible with the UK’s international obligations”.

Mijatovi? also said she found proposals to deprive most people arriving to the UK on small boats of any protection from legislation to counter modern slavery as “another disturbing aspect of the bill”. She raised a red flag about the bill’s “widespread powers of detention” which she thinks would mean people being locked up for “virtually unlimited” periods of time “without sufficient possibilities for independent judicial oversight”.

She concluded:

In my view, the bill’s provisions create clear and direct tension with well-established and fundamental human rights standards, including under the ECHR.

The Council of Europe monitors human rights across its 46 members and led to the creation of the European court of human rights, a b?te noire for Eurosceptic Conservatives.

The letter comes as the prime minister comes under pressure from the right of his party to ensure migrants cannot use the Strasbourg appeals system to block deportation flights. Legal experts have questioned government claims of ECHR “reform”, casting doubt over whether the Strasbourg court was likely to weaken any mechanisms intended to protect people “facing an imminent risk of irreparable harm”.

Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman, the home secretary, did a short walkabout before his PM Connect event in Chelmsford, Essex, PA Media reports. PA says:

The street was quiet at around 9am and the pair did not stop to chat to any of the small number of people on the street or go into any shops.

One woman shouted out: “Allow migrants into our country.”

Shouting at the PM and home secretary, the woman added: “Go away. We don’t want you here.”

UPDATE: Here is video of the incident.

Jeremy Corbyn will not stand as a Labour MP at the next election, Keir Starmer will confirm at tomorrow’s meeting of the party’s national executive committee (NEC), my colleague Pippa Crerar reports.

Q: [From the Telegraph] Do you think capital gains tax rates should be brought in with income tax rates, as Labour seems to be considering?

Sunak ignores the question about tax rates, but stresses what the government is doing to help people with the cost of living.

Q: Will you open talks with the new SNP leader on an independence referendum?

Sunak says he is a big supporter of the union. He points out that he was in Wales at the end of last week.

And that’s it. The event is over.

Q: [From the Sun] Prime ministers since Tony Blair have been promising to tackle antisocial behaviour. Why should we trust you to deliver?

Sunak says people have seen what he has done as PM, and he gets things done. He only promises what he can deliver. He is confident he can deliver on this.

He says he is doing significant things – banning laughing gas, and increasing hotspots.

Q: Are you concerned by reports saying Suella Braverman is acting as a sock puppet for Tory rebels on migration?

Sunak says the government has to address this. He thinks the government is doing it in a compassionate way.

Braverman has done a “superb job”, on this. They have been working to get the leglislation right.

This bill goes further than previous legislation. It will be effective. But the government has to abide by its international obligations too, he says. He says this bill will do that.

The question was inspired by this story in the Times. It says:

Suella Braverman is accused of secretly backing a backbench rebellion against her own illegal migration bill to push Downing Street into toughening up measures to tackle the small boats crisis.

Senior government sources said the home secretary was a “sock puppet” under the influence of Tory hardliners who believe that Rishi Sunak has not gone far enough to clamp down on Channel crossings.

Q: The chief constable in Essex says officers are having to take second jobs, or use food banks, because they are not paid enough. Do you agree they should be paid more?

Sunak says the government has accepted the recommendation on police pay.

But the government has to get inflation down. Halving inflation is his top priority, he says. He says he has a plan, and it will work.

If there is nothing else, you can trust that I can manage an economy.

Q: Will shops still be allowed to sell laughing gas?

Sunak says the current law says it is not meant to be sold as a drug, but that is clearly not working. The government will consult on how to enforce the new law.

People do need to be able to buy this for catering and healthcare.

The government will work on this over the spring and the summer.

Sunak says the Louise Casey report was appalling. But there are countless good police officers, he says.

He ignores an invitation to say he wants to see more officers like Happy Valley’s Catherine Cawood recruited.

Sunak tries to move on to the next question, but a man in the audience who is not a journalist interrupts, and asks why the police are not more visible. Can’t they at least drive around, he asks.

Sunak says it is not for him to say how much time they should spend in cars, and how much patrolling on foot. But he wants the police to be as effective as possible, he says.

Q: Should children as young as eight be strip-searched?

Sunak says the report on this that came out at the weekend, from the children’s commissioner, is concerning. The Home Office will look at this in detail.

Sunak is now taking media questions.

Mark Easton from the BBC is finally allowed to ask his question.

Q: Your expert advisers on drugs say banning laughing gas could have unintended consequences. They say this ban risks harming children and empowering criminals.

Sunak says it is important to have a zero-tolerance approach. He says people are fed up with the mess caused by the canisters.

Places like the Netherlands and California have already banned this.

And it is already illegal to sell this for use as a drug, he says.

He says lots of people have spoken to him about this.