Afternoon summary
-
Reform UK says it has reported ITV to the police over its undercover racism exposé about the party, which it claims left some members “pyschologically damaged”. (See 3.50pm.)
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
Activists from Fossil Free London staged a protest outside the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero today. They were protesting about the Jackdaw decision announced today, and also urging the government not to approve the Rosebank oil field, where the decision is pending.
Robin Wells, director of the campaign group, said:
This decision is salted with the tears of every Nepalese person who saw someone they loved swept away in a river tsunami and it’s stained with the blood of everyone in Valencia who died as cars afloat in mud, sewage and enough rainwater for a year collided into their bodies in streets that had become rivers.
Although we cannot right now hear people in Australia, LA and Portugal crying in fear as their homes and worlds burn, these are the knock-on consequences of corporations that continue to drill fossil fuels and the governments that permit it, knowing the damage caused.
Our government must not double down on madness now. They must not lap-up industry propaganda again for the next North Sea project in their in-tray. If they believe in a future that protects people’s homes and safety, not endangers them, they must stop Rosebank.
The Department for Education has announced that Simon Ridley will be its new permanent secretary. Ridley will move from the Home Office, where he has been second permanent secretary.
He will replace Susan Acland-Hood, who is taking a new job outside government. Acland-Hood became head of the DfE in 2020 after the previous permanent secretary, Jonathan Slater, was sacked during Covid after the department oversaw a botched exam grading system that infuriated parents and pupils.
NEU says robust action on antisemitism in schools needed, but rejects reports call for teacher impartiality rules to be tightened
Richard Adams is the Guardian’s education editor.
The review of antisemitism in England’s schools and colleges by Sir David Bell has now been published, with the Department for Education saying it will adopt its recommendations including antisemitism training for education leaders, strengthened safeguarding guidance and improved reporting and investigation of antisemitic incidents.
Bell’s full report goes into detail about the challenges that Jewish students and institutions face directly from antisemitism, as well as ways to tackle antisemitism in schools across the country.
The review also talks about the external pressures that schools face from parents and other community members, noting:
Schools and colleges should make decisions based on safeguarding, professional conduct, employment law and evidence, not on who can generate the strongest public pressure campaign or out of fear of stoking community tensions.
Presenting the review to parliament, education secretary Lucy Powell said:
We have a duty to teach this generation and the next what antisemitism is, why it’s wrong and what happens when it takes hold. That goes for every school and college, whether or not they have Jewish staff and students.
Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said:
Robust action to challenge antisemitism is certainly needed because young people are exposed to antisemitic ideas and tropes, including on social media, and to influencers and figures who espouse violence. Educational experiences that empower young people to develop positive attitudes and respect for each other are critical.
But Kebede rejected the need for schools to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism or new rules on political impartiality, saying they would make it harder for schools to discuss complex world events. He said:
This report will not tackle antisemitism. It wrongly calls into question the professionalism of teachers. The existing rules on impartiality in the classroom are very clear and teachers take that responsibility very seriously.
For three years, teachers have been responding to concerned pupils’ questions about this conflict. These classroom discussions are familiar territory, not uncharted ground.
The recommendations in the report include one saying the DfE “should strengthen guidance for schools on political impartiality” and another saying school leaders should “consider the appropriateness of political expression and identifiers in their respective settings”.
UPDATE: British Jewish leaders have welcomed the recommendations of the Bell Review into antisemitism in schools and colleges, which calls for tougher action to tackle antisemitism in England’s education system, Aamna Mohdin writes.
Communal leaders stressed the need for concerns to lead to meaningful change, alongside greater efforts to educate pupils about contemporary antisemitism and celebrate the richness and diversity of Jewish life.
Board of Deputies vice president Karen Newman said:
We welcome the recommendations of Sir David Bell to tackle antisemitism in schools and colleges and the commitment of the secretary of state for education to implement them. The struggle against extremism and antisemitism begins with education, so we must get this right in schools. This is not just about protecting Jewish pupils and staff, but protecting all our children from hateful and extremist ideas, and supporting schools to tackle them where they arise.
Rabbi Charley Baginky and Rabbi Josh Levy, co-leads of the Movement for Progressive Judaism, said:
Sir David Bell’s important review exposes serious failures in how schools recognise and respond to antisemitism. But alongside that urgent question of how schools deal with hatred and educate about Jewish persecution, we also need to ensure they teach about Jewish creativity, music, literature, humour and the extraordinary pleasure of belonging to this diverse tradition. We cannot expect Jewish children to feel they belong if we fail to recognise just how many different ways there are to be Jewish.
Michael Newman, chief executive of the Association of Jewish Refugees (AJR), said:
The Bell Report’s findings hit particularly close to home for AJR, which represents Holocaust refugees, survivors and the UK’s largest community of their descendants. For families whose lives were indelibly shaped by antisemitism, seeing Jewish children face such hatred in Britain today is particularly painful.
But Holocaust education alone cannot tackle contemporary antisemitism. That is why AJR is expanding its funding to support projects that directly confront anti-Jewish racism, including convening a cross-sector steering group to develop a classroom resource addressing contemporary antisemitism. We owe it to those who survived, to the memory of those who perished, and to future generations to turn the lessons of the past into action today.
Updated
Karl Turner MP has Labour whip restored after apologising for 'overly robust' and 'unaceptable' conduct towards colleagues
Karl Turner has had the Labour whip restored after apologising for what he describes as an “overly robust” and “unacceptable” approach towards colleagues. He has admitted that his behaviour caused offence.
He has issued this statement and says he will not be making any further comment.
Turner had the whip suspended in March.
Burnham backs mandatory suicide prevention training for social workers after parent-carer Matilda Davis’s death
Andy Burnham has backed mandatory suicide prevention training for social workers after the “devastating” death of Matilda Davis, a parent-carer who killed herself minutes after meeting professionals, Josh Halliday reports.
Reform UK claims undercover racism exposé has left some of its members 'psychologically damaged' as it reports ITV to police
Reform UK says it has reported “multiple” ITV journalists, and the company’s board of directors, to the police on the grounds that their undercover reporters working on the exposé of racism in the party broke the law. The party says it will also be suing them for damages.
Zia Yusuf, the party’s home affairs spokesperson, posted this on social media summarising his party’s allegations.
Reform UK has reported ITV, its board, and its undercover reporters to the police.
Some of the crimes carry up to 10 years in prison.
They forged a passport.
They directly interfered in elections and almost certainly altered the results. Being paid to “canvass” for Reform in crucial wards we lost by a few dozen votes.
They lied to a veteran about their service and left him “violated”.
This is unprecedented.
The police are now involved.
Scrutiny of political parties is one thing.
But anyone breaking the law to try and ruin the lives of Reform’s staff, members or volunteers will be reported to the police and pursued relentlessly in the courts.
In a video setting out his case against ITV at greater length, Yusuf claimed ITV “psychologically damaged innocent and decent Reform staff and members who were not featured in any documentary”.
As an example of this, Yusuf said that one of the undercover reporters met a Reform UK member in Portsmouth who had served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He said:
One of the undercover reporters told him that they shared the same military background. That was a lie. The marine, believing him, took him for a drink. They spent hours talking about their service, and the marine shared deeply personal stories from the front line because he believed he was talking to a friend and a fellow soldier. He has told us he feels violated.
Yusuf also explained why he was alleging electoral interference. In Portsmouth two undercover reporters were tasked with delivering leaflets in one ward where Reform UK lost in the local elections by 24 votes, and in another ward where Reform UK lost by just 85 votes. Yusuf said these margins were smaller than the number of leaflets the undercover reporters were supposed to deliver.
But he did not assert in the video that they failed to deliver the leaflets, and he offered no evidence that they had done anything to suppress the Reform UK vote at the time.
Asked about the legal threats, an ITV spokesperson said:
ITV stands by its journalism. The programme Undercover: A Year In Reform was produced in compliance with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code, relevant laws, and its broadcast is in the public interest. All journalists were instructed to operate within this framework and did so under the supervision of the programme’s producers. Should the police get in touch we would fully cooperate.
People tend to assume that a public interest defence will protect journalists from allegations of minor law-breaking if they are investigating wrongdoing. In fact, the law is more complicated than that, a public interest defence applies in some instances and not in others, and there are probably enough allegations in the Yusuf video to keep a media lawyer busy for days assessing the evidence.
But, in practice, it is rare for the criminal law to be used successfully against legitimate journalists. When the Crown Prosecution Service prosecuted police officers who had taken bribes, and the journalists who had paid them, under Operation Elveden, the officers were largely convicted but the journalists were largely acquitted. Juries seemed to accept they were operating in the public interest.
In the ITV case, the public interest case for the programme is particularly strong. Reform UK has accepted that some of the people exposed making racist comments should not be in the party – although it has also claimed they were not representative of the membership as a whole.
Here is video from PMQs of Andy Burnham and Kemi Badenoch talking about the Jackdaw decision.
No 10 plays down Fahnbulleh's lack of support for home secretary's original ILR proposals
At the No 10 post-PMQs lobby briefing, Downing Street rejected suggestions that Miatta Fahnbulleh was undermining Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, with her comments about indefinite leave to remain (ILR) this morning. (See 10.44am and 11.34am.) A spokesperson said that Mahmood was consulting on the plans announced last year and that she is engaged in “a thorough piece of work to ensure we get this right and have the right arrangements in place”. Asked about the Fahnbulleh interview, the spokesperson said:
The energy secretary made clear she backs reforms and the work that Shabana is doing. She was asked about specific elements of proposals that are subject to the results of the consultation.
Updated
The Green MP Siân Berry has welcomed Miatta Fahnbulleh’s decision not to endorse the home secretary’s plan to make migrant workers wait much longer for indefinite leave to remain. (See 10.44am.) But she urged Fahnbulleh to go further, and to also speak out about separate plans in the immigration and asylum bill. The bill, which is going through the Commons, will tighten various aspects of asylum law, including by allowing the Home Office to recover from some refugees money spent by the state housing them while their asylum claim was considered.
Berry said:
This Reform-inspired bill is a legacy of Keir Starmer’s leadership that will harm communities who want to welcome and support refugees, penalise desperate people for needing support, split up already war-torn families, and force people needing asylum here to live in a state of instability and poverty for decades.
I urge Miatta and her colleagues to do the right thing, and speak up more strongly and sooner against these plans, so we can together force our new prime minister to drop this awful bill.
Lindsay Hoyle accuses Fahnbulleh of 'immense discourtesy' to MPs after she misses Commons Jackdaw statement
In the Commons, Michael Shanks, the energy minister, is making a statement about the Jackdaw decision.
He is doing it because his boss, Miatta Fahnbulleh, is in Aberdeen.
Before he started, Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, said it was an “immense discourtesy” to the Commons that Fahnbulleh was not there herself.
And he said it was “shameful” that her department announced the news to the media first.
He said:
It is simply not good enough that it was trailed by the press last night and announced all over the media this morning by the secretary of state before it could be properly scrutinised in this house.
I’m sure there will be a leak inquiry, or is it that this department is deliberately briefing out to the media?
Hoyle said that, under the ministerial code, ministers were supposed to make important announcements to the Commons first.
Shanks told Hoyle that he respected what he had said, and that he would take these points back to the department.
Hoyle was not impressed. He said:
I’m sorry that Aberdeen is more important than the MPs they’ve elected.
Updated
Fahnbulleh leaning towards rejecting Rosebank oilfield
Miatta Fahnbulleh is leaning towards rejecting the giant Rosebank oilfield, the Guardian understands, in what would be a blow for the North Sea energy industry and a major victory for climate campaigners. Kiran Stacey has the story.
Related: Energy secretary leaning towards rejecting Rosebank oilfield
Donald Trump welcomes Jackdaw announcement
Judging by the latest post on Truth Social, it looks as thought the Jackdaw announcement may have made Fox News in the US this morning. This is from Donald Trump.
PMQs - snap verdict
That felt like quite a routine PMQs, but it was one that went quite well for Andy Burnham. It was not so much that he won; it was more that he emerged completely unscathed because none of Kemi Badenoch’s attack lines landed. It is always hard for an opposition leader to criticise a decision they agree with (Jackdaw), and so she tried the argument that Labour was to blame for rerunning the application process instead of fighting the legal challenge against the original decision all the way to the supreme court (where it may have lost anyway). Burnham’s response, that the Tories were to blame for mucking it up in the first place, was more convincing. After that Badenoch trotted through some very familiar lines on welfare and debt. It was hard to see what “story” she was trying to land, and it felt a bit as if she was not trying too hard. Maybe she is saving up her ammunition for her budget response next week.
Burnham also successfully seized the initiative with an announcement, about standing charges on gas bills. These are only worth about £100 a year, and presumably the money would be recouped from consumers in some other forms. Still, it’s news.
But what made Burnham’s performance quite strong today was not so much his standing charge teaser (which sounded like a hint for what might be in the budget) as his overall tone. One of the big complaints about PMQs is that MPs treat it as just a game. Badenoch herself is quite open about this, and she has said that she only started to do it well when she decided to view it like a panto. Burnham, though, can speak in the Commons with a degree of conviction and moral force that marks him out. We saw it today when he was talking about Aberfan, or social care, or Covid, or the importance of big decisions. This does not make him unique, and of course he is a professional politician, and he can equivocate as much as the rest of them. But at other moments he can convey seriousness and sincerity, rooted in lived experience, better than others. By comparison, Badenoch sounds glib.
David Davis (Con) asks if the PM would speak to the defence secretary to stop British agencies acting with “credulous complicity with our enemies trying to use lawfare against our soldiers”.
He was referring in particular to a Sunday Times report at the weekend about how SAS soldiers were hounded over “bogus allegations”.
Burnham said he would be happy to meet Davis to discuss this. He wanted to give an assurance to solidiers that the government would “always have their back” and treat them fairly.
UPDATE: Davis said:
The Sunday Times reported on its front page how Ministry of Defence police attempted to prosecute five members of the SAS over bogus allegations made by our enemies. They arrested the soldiers and subjected them to continuous—and frankly incompetent—investigation for three years while they were fighting ISIS on our behalf. That action has travelled like a shockwave through Hereford, destroying morale and undermining one of our best fighting units. Nobody wants to put soldiers above the law, but will the Prime Minister speak to the Defence Secretary and stop British agencies acting with credulous complicity with enemies that are trying to use lawfare against our soldiers?
And Burnham replied:
I am aware of the high levels of concern among those who served in the SAS, and [Davis] has spoken to that. Without going into all the details, I am happy to meet him to discuss the case and see how we can resolve some of the issues that arise from it, giving an assurance to people who served this country that we will have their back and always treat them fairly.
Updated
Burnham says Reform UK has not done enough in response to ITV News racism exposé about 'politics of poison' in party
Zubir Ahmed (Lab) asked Burnham to condemn the revelations in the ITV News exposé of racism in Reform UK.
Burnham said all parties in the Commons should take a stand against racism. And he paid tribute in particular to migrant care workers.
He said MPs should “root out the politics of poison which has seeped far too far into our politics”.
And he said “the firmest of action” should be taken in reponse to these ITV revelations. But he said he was “still waiting to see the right level of action” from Reform UK.
Burnham backs call for mayor of Wessex, and says he wants full devolution for south-west of England
Edward Morello, the Lib Dem MP for West Dorset, asked Burnham if he would commit to having a mayor of Wessex by 2028.
Burnham said he would. He said he was “always happy to create more mayors”. He said he would like to see full devolution for the south-west of England. He says Cornish MPs were in No 10 North this week to speak about devolution deal.
James Cleverly (Con) said Burnham managed to increase police numbers when he was mayor of Manchester. But Sadiq Khan has not done that in London, he said.
What is it that he was able to get right and that I was able to get right [when Cleverly was home secretary] but Sadiq Khan, catastrophically, has failed to get right.
Cleverly wants to be the Tory candidate for London mayor for 2028.
Burnham said this was the second time Cleverly has used PMQs to ask a question about London, not Essex, where he is an MP. He suggested Khan was constrained by lack of government support when the Tories were in office.
Updated
Jerome Mayhew (Con) asked a follow up to the question he asked last week. He asked if Burnham had a meeting scheduled with Khaldoon Al Mubarak, the Manchester City chair, scheduled in September.
Burnham said he had nothing to add to the statement he had already made.
Burnham says government will consider 'further measures' Royal Mail does not improve its 'unacceptable' service
Imogen Walker (Lab) said her constituents were suffering serious problems because Royal Mail delivery services were so bad.
Burnham replied:
Royal Mail’s service has been unacceptable for far too long. They have been asked in to see ministers on a regular basis. Ofcom is looking at the situation as well.
Let’s be clear, they need to bring forward a plan to restore service standards to the level they need to be up. They need to do it quickly, or we will consider further measures.
Ellie Chowns, the parliamentary leader of the Greens, asked why Burnham was “pouring more fuel on the fire of climate breakdown” by approving Jackdaw. Why did he not accept expert evidence saying fossil fuels should stay in the ground?
Burnham said the UK still needs gas. He went on:
There’s a big difference, between an ideological approach, which I think is what [Chowns is] putting to the house, and a pragmatic approach, which is what I am announcing today.
Burnham ducks Lib Dem question about whether Elon Musk should have satellite licences restricted after 'beyond the pale' help for Putin
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, asked Burnham if he was going to wait until after the election until considering the case for joining the EU single market.
Burnham said at the UK-EU summit next month he would try to get a better deal covering food, energy and immigration. He went on:
If this house was to come together, it would give me the strongest position to go to that summit and get a good deal for.
Davey said, in the light of the PM’s position on Europe, “I feel that next week’s budget will not be the growth budget our country needs.”
He went on:
This week Ukraine’s defence system was seriously undermined by the US restricting access to Elon Musk’s Starlink system.
Musk says that the order came from the White House, but the Telegraph and The Wall Street Journal have revealed that Musk put the idea to Donald Trump himself.
Now, I understand the prime minister’s reluctance to criticise the present United States, but does he agree that directly aiding Putin in this way is beyond the pale? And will he work with European allies to prevent Elon Musk getting the licenses he wants? It would make our continent even more dependent on his satellite system.
Burnham said he had “concerns about any move that diminishes the military capability of Ukraine”. But he said the situation had to be handled carefully. The UK was working to help Ukraine, he said.
UPDATE: Burnham said:
Of course, I have concerns about any move that diminishes the military capability of Ukraine in the position in which it finds itself at this moment in time.
Of course, he is right about that, and I am sure that sentiment is echoed right around this country. But it is a situation that is currently fragile and needs careful handling.”
At this moment in time, I think we need to handle the situation carefully, so that we can bring back all sides to get the support behind President Zelensky and Ukraine.
And I can assure him, the UK Government is working on every single level to bring that about.
Updated
Burnham defends Palestine Action ban, saying decision taken after 'rigorous and evidence-based process'
Claire Hanna (SDLP) asks about Sally Rooney’s books not being on sale in the UK, and invites Burnham to review the Palestine Action ban.
Burnham says:
When it comes to the prescription of Palestine Action, it followed a rigorous and evidence-based process that came before this house, endorsed by Parliament. The matter is alive, a legal case, so I won’t comment further than that.
UPDATE: Later Claire Hanna, the SDLP leader, said her intervention on Palestine Action was partly driven, not just by the “immense suffering caused by the genocide in Gaza”, but because of the Sally Rooney book ban, Lisa O’Carroll writes.
Stars including Paul Mescal, Jessie Buckley and Gary Linekar have condemned the withdrawal of her bestselling books from British shelves to avoid prosecution after the Irish author pledged to give royalties to the proscribed group.
“People are rightly questioning why the UK government is standing over a decision that risks narrowing democratic space and restricting legitimate political expression,” said Hanna.
Updated
Badenoch asks if Burnham will follow the Andy Haldane plan.
Burnham says “there are signs of growing strength in the British economy”. And he taunts the Tories over the mini budget.
Badenoch says Burnham is not going to cut welfare spending. Under his plans, it will go up.
She asks if he accepts his failure to cut borrowing is pushing up inflation.
Burnham again defends his social care policy. And, on welfare, he says he does not want to see people in their 20s out of work.
On inflation, he says:
[Badenoch] mentions inflation, though she may notice that there is a situation ongoing in the Middle East where we don’t have full control.
But I can of that situation … the fundamentals of the British economy are getting stronger and stronger under this government. We will take the right long term decisions, and she should wait for the budget, and she will see that laid out in this house.
Burnham defends taking action on 'small things', like train noise, but says he's taking 'big decisions' too
Badenoch says she has read the IMF report and it has downgrades the UK’s growth forecast.
We are spending more on interest payments than we do on schools, the army and the police combined. Meanwhile, the prime minister is worrying about loud music on trains. This is not serious.
She asks Burnham if he will cut welfare spending.
Burnham says he cut spending on his first day in office, on digital ID.
He goes on:
She asks about the big decisions. I want to come directly back to what she’s saying. I’m not going to apologise for doing the small things that help people have better lives. I’m not going to apologise for that.
But I also take the big decisions that they have avoided for many years and let me go directly to one, directly to one social care.
I grasped the nettle in a way that nobody on their side ever has, and I made a difficult spending decision to lay a path towards a National Care Service.
Have they had the time to read the Covid inquiry report yesterday about the appalling state of social care as it went in to the pandemic? The hundreds of thousands of British people who suffered as a result of that, the lives that were lost.
I need no lectures from the other side about taking tough decisions on social care.
Badenoch says the national debt has reached £3trn. And she raises the criticism of his economic policies from Andy Haldane in the FT yesterday. What is the PM doing to get borrowing down?
Burnham says Badenoch is showing why the Tories “got those decisions wrong”.
Because she didn’t and they didn’t give any regard to our climate obligations. These things have to be considered in the round.
And he says the IMF has praised the UK’s record on deficit reduction.
Badenoch asks Burnham to accept that every barrel of oil from the North Sea is one that we don’t need to buy from Putin.
Burnham says again she is asking him “to take further decisions that she, messed up when she was in, in government”.
He says these are quasi-judicial decisions.
Burnham says government considering removing standing charges from gas bills
Kemi Badenoch thanks Burnham for finally backing Jackdaw. The Tories approved it in 2022, she says. And rather than right the leftie activists who tried to block it in court. Labour appointed one of them as energy secretary, she says.
She asks Burnham to lift the ban on new licence applications.
Burnham says he has made a decision on something the Tories “messed up”.
He says the government has made a bridge to the future, the transition to clean energy.
He says he has asked the chancellor and the energy secretary to consider if standing charges can be removed from gas bills. They will report back “at the earliest opportunity”.
Alex McIntyre (Lab) asks about constituents asked to pay £50,000 for a lift repair when they bought a home having been told a guarantee would pay for repairs like this. He asks when leasehold reform will help people like this.
Burnham says the leasehold reform legislation is coming.
Clive Jones (Lib Dem) says too many people have their cancers missed. He asks Burnham if he will suppport Jones’s private member’s bill on cancer reporting.
Burnham says the government has a national cancer plan that is delivering the improvements Jones is seeking.
Andy Burnham starts by saying he is welcoming the Sultan of Oman today. He also refers to Aberfan, saying he visited the village on Monday and heard how the injustices that community suffered at the hands of the state “still hurt”.
Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, starts by saying it is the 60th anniversary of the Aberfan disaster. He says he remembers hearing about this as a child, and he says it was very moving to meet one of the survivors recently.
Most Labour MPs seem to be either supportive of the Jackdaw decision or, if they are opposed to it, willing to keep their views private.
One exception is the leftwing Richard Burgon. In a post on social media, he says:
An absolutely terrible decision on Jackdaw.
It will do nothing to lower people’s energy bills or improve our energy security.
Investing in renewable energy is the way to do that.
But this does not mean that Labour MPs would also approve a decision to greenlight the Rosebank oilfield. That would be much more contentious, because its carbon impact would be far worse.
Total UK government debt hits £3tn for first time while inflation jumps to highest in nearly a year
In the light of her speech yesterday, it would be surprising if Kemi Badenoch does not ask about government spending. As Heather Stewart reports, the Treasury ran a higher than expected budget deficit of £24.5bn last month – and total government debt is estimated to have hit £3tn for the first time.
Related: UK government borrowing rises to £24.5bn as John Healey prepares for budget
Julia Kollewe has more on the business live blog.
Burnham faces Badenoch at PMQs
PMQs is starting soon.
Here is the list of MPs who have a question.
Government to crack down on ‘cosmetic cowboys’
The government has launched a crackdown on “cosmetic cowboys” performing liquid Brazilian butt lifts (BBLs) on the high street in a bid to drive out rogue operators and raise standards across the board, the Press Association reports. PA says:
Ministers said that patients who choose to have cosmetic procedures deserve to know they are in safe hands and not risking their lives.
The government also remains committed to bringing in a licensing scheme to ensure “lower risk” treatments such as Botox and lip fillers remain safe.
Under the new rules, treatments that involve injecting fillers anywhere other than the face, such as BBLs, would be legally defined as cosmetic surgical procedures – meaning they can only be performing by qualified medics.
Other high-risk treatments such as deep chemical peels and vampire facials – which use microneedling to inject platelets drawn from a patient’s own blood back into the face – would be restricted to doctors, dentists, some nurses, midwives and pharmacists.
Those who flout the rules could be hit with unlimited fines or fixed penalties up to £4,000.
Sophy Ridge from Sky News has posted on social media the full transcript from the part of her interview where she tried, and failed, to get Miatta Fahnbulleh to say that she backed the Home Office plan to make some migrants wait 15 years for indefinite leave to remain.
But Sunder Katwala, from British Future, a thinktank focusing on race, identity and migration, says that other ministers are also refusing to defend the original proposals that were published last year.
v useful to see the transcript. But worth noting that neither the Home Secretary nor PM will publicly defend the pre-consultation proposals either now
Home Sec called it “policy to be settled” at select committee. Her conference speech says it will be fair. PM says ‘fresh eyes’
There will be two statements in the Commons after PMQs. First, the energy minister Michael Shanks will deliver one about Jackdaw. And then Lucy Powell, the education secretary, will give one about the review into antisemitism in schools.
Richard Adams has a story about that review here.
Related: Schools in England must recognise antisemitism as distinct category of harm, report says
This is from Kemi Badenoch on the Jackdaw decision.
Finally. Labour spent 2 years faffing about to make a decision which Conservatives had already approved 2 years ago.
If they’d done this in the summer we’d have had that gas heating British homes this Christmas.
An unnecessary waste of time and money by a party that puts its own interest above the country’s.
(The last government did approve the Jackdaw development. But that decsion was ruled unlawful, which is why Labour chose to do it again.)
Fahnbulleh declines to back Mahmood's proposal to make some migrant workers wait 15 years for indefinite leave to remain
Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, has declined to back the home secretary’s plan to make some migrant workers wait up to 15 years before they can apply for permanent residency in the UK (indefinite leave to remain, or ILF).
Earlier this week, it emerged that she published a comment criticising the plan on her constituency website – before she removed it supposedly because it was a poorly-phrased summary of her position drafted by an aide.
In interviews today, asked specifically if she backed migrants having to wait for up to 15 years for ILR, she refused to support this proposal.
Asked about this on Sky News, she said:
We have got to reform our immigration system, and my view is that we need a system that is based on the principle of compassion, contribution.
And so there is a package of reforms. The home secretary [Shabana Mahmood] has been consulting on this. She’s looking at the range of responses, and she will come out with the measures that we take forward.
No-one can look at our immigration system – and I say this as someone that came to this country as a refugee – and not believe that it’s broken and not believe that we need to fundamentally reform it.
But our principles has to be a system where we’ve got control, but ultimately a system that when people do come to this country, they are able to integrate, they are able to contribute, and that we both respect but also value that contribution.
Mahmood is proposing most migrant workers should have to wait 10 years for ILF, not five years as now. But under her plans foreign care workers would have to wait 15 years.
Fahnbulleh came to the UK as a child refugee from Liberia.
In its splash story today, the Times says Mahmood is “fighting a rearguard action to save her migration reforms in the face of mounting public criticism from cabinet colleagues”.
The report says:
Andy Burnham, the prime minister, is considering exempting care workers from plans to extend the qualifying period for claiming indefinite leave to remain (ILR) from five years to 15 years.
However, the Home Office has argued that the move could backfire because it could lead to an exodus of foreign care workers from their jobs once they gained permanent residence and were no longer bound by the terms of their visas.
Updated
The Science Media Centre, which publishes comments from scientists on stories in the news, has published reaction this morning to the Jackdaw decision from four academics specialising in climate science. None of them are enthusiastic. Two of them are critical (one extremely critical), while two of them argue the decision has modest benefits.
(They are all fully committed to the transition to renewables.)
The most positive comment is probably this one, from Prof Jon Gluyas, emeritus chair in geoenergy carbon capture and storage at Durham University.
Development of Jackdaw will improve UK energy security and reduce the UK’s emissions because it will displace imported LNG, some of which has emissions as high as burning coal.
And the most negative is probably this one, from Richard Sulley, senior research fellow in sustainability policy at the University of Sheffield’s Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures.
Why approve the Jackdaw gas field? It makes no sense economically, it will create only 27 jobs, and some modest tax receipts for the exchequer. Environmentally if it displaces imported LNG it will reduce emissions marginally, but if it displaces Norwegian gas they will be worse. It will do nothing for the cost of living, the volume extracted will be too small to have a material impact on the global markets. There’s no energy security benefit, it in fact keeps UK industries and consumers exposed to the international markets that set prices and the wills of foreign governments who can control the flow of resources.
Climate campaigners condemn ‘maddening’ decision to approve Jackdaw gasfield
Fiona Harvey, the Guardian’s environment editor, has more here on climate campaigners condemning the Jackdaw decision.
Related: Climate campaigners condemn ‘maddening’ decision to approve Jackdaw gasfield
Jackdaw development will create 27 new jobs, and safeguard 273 existing ones, government says
The government itself has admitted that the Jackdaw development will only create a small number of new jobs. This is from the small print of its news release.
The developer estimates that Jackdaw will create 27 new direct jobs and safeguard 273 existing jobs that would otherwise be lost. The developer also estimates that the project will add around £2.9 billion to the UK economy.
Over its lifetime, Jackdaw is estimated to produce gas with an energy equivalent to around 40 million barrels of oil.
Here is an explainer by Jill Ambrose about the Jackdaw decision.
Related: What does the UK’s approval of the Jackdaw gasfield mean?
But environmental groups have condemned the decision. Ami McCarthy, head of politics for Greenpeace UK, said:
Approving Jackdaw shows the toxic grip fossil fuel lobbyists still hold over our energy policy. Andy Burnham promised pragmatism [see 8.40am], but there is nothing pragmatic about rubber-stamping a project that won’t lower energy bills, won’t boost energy security and will create just 27 full-time jobs …
True pragmatism means severing our reliance on expensive oil and gas that leaves British households broke, supercharges extreme weather, and leaves our energy security at the mercy of petrostates.
Danny Gross, a climate campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said:
Is the prime minister living in a parallel universe? One where we haven’t just endured our hottest summer on record, with droughts, wildfires and, in all likelihood, the most heat-related deaths on record? And where the UN hasn’t warned that we’re on the brink of breaching the all-important 1.5 degree warming limit?
And this is from Tessa Khan, executive director of Uplift, an organisation campaigning for the transition to renewables.
Shell will be cheering this decision but it won’t knock a penny off our energy bills, which is what’s keeping people up at night, or make a meaningful difference to our gas supply.
Jackdaw will provide around just 2% of our gas demand for roughly ten years. It has been oversold and won’t stop the decline in North Sea jobs, as it will be largely unmanned and operated remotely.
Some Labour-affiliated unions have been among those organisations most in favour of Jackdaw being allowed to go ahead. Gary Smith, the GMB general secretary, issued this statement this morning.
This is great news. Andy Burnham’s government deserves real credit for doing the right thing for our country.
For too long, this and other vital decisions on our gas supplies and storage have been put off, risking the UK’s energy security at a time of worrying international volatility.
The Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce has welcomed the Jackdaw decision – while challenging the government to also approve the Rosebank oilfield.
Russell Borthwick, its chief executive, said:
This is a hugely welcome decision, and exactly the sort of pragmatic call the North Sea has been crying out for.
Jackdaw is 99.9% complete and, with approval now secured, gas from this field will be flowing into homes up and down the country within weeks … Every molecule of gas we produce in the North Sea, under some of the world’s highest environmental standards, is a molecule we don’t have to import on a tanker from overseas …
But Jackdaw cannot be the end of the story. Rosebank is every bit as vital to our energy security and every bit as ready to deliver for the UK supply chain anchored here in the North East of Scotland.
Healey announces initial £2bn funding for Energy Wealth Fund, which will allocate some North Sea tax revenue for renewables
Alongside the Jackdaw announcement, the government has said it is setting up an Energy Wealth Fund. This will in effect ringfence some North Sea oil and gas tax revenues for investment in renewables.
In its news release, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero says:
The chancellor is also announcing today the establishment of a new Energy Wealth Fund, which will use tax revenues from North Sea oil and gas to invest in renewable and low carbon energy projects and support the green transition. Reflecting our commitment to the North Sea, this will start with an initial £2bn injection of funding, with future revenues from the North Sea flowing into the fund over time …
The Energy Wealth Fund will support investment in the renewable and low carbon energy industries that will power Britain’s future. It will help ensure more value from Britain’s energy resources is invested for the long term, supporting the green transition and creating a lasting national asset for future generations.
John Healey, the chancellor, said:
Through our new Energy Wealth Fund, we will invest in the clean energy industries of the future, creating jobs, driving growth and strengthening Britain’s energy security.
Updated
Energy secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh says approving Jackdaw gasfield won't lead to cheaper energy bills
In her interviews this morning, Miatta Fahnbulleh confirmed that approving the Jackdaw gasfield would not lead to cheaper energy bills for consumers.
On LBC Nick Ferrari asked if the decision meant that his listeners would have lower bills. Fahnbulleh replied:
No, and I think it’s really important that we’re honest about this. That was not a consideration in the decision because it won’t mean cheaper bills.
This was about energy security and having homegrown energy, and it was also because we thought it was compatible with our with our climate commitments.
Fahnbulleh did accept that the price of energy was a “fundamental” issue. But she said the government was addressing this in other ways, like removing VAT from electricity bills.
Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, was on the Today programme this morning. Asked if she though the UK should reconsider having 2050 as its target date for reaching net zero carbon emissions, she replied: “That’s not my view.”
UK inflation rises by more than expected to 3.5% as war drives up fuel prices
UK inflation climbed by more than expected in September to 3.5% after a surge in prices from the conflict in the Middle East that has pushed up the cost of diesel to record levels, Phillip Inman reports.
Related: UK inflation rises by more than expected to 3.5% as war drives up fuel prices
Here is the official Jackdaw decision.
Labour accused of ‘climate vandalism’ by Green leader Polanski after Jackdaw gasfield approved
Good morning. After months of delay, the government has taken a decision on one of the most difficult climate crisis/energy supply challenges on the table. It has approved the Jackdaw gasfield, east of Aberdeen. Peter Walker and Kiran Stacey have the story here.
Related: UK approves Jackdaw gasfield in North Sea
Here is the government’s news release. And if you want to all the technical documents relating to the decision, you will find them here.
At the last election, Labour said it would not approve new oil and gas licences for the North Sea, but that it would allow existing projects to go ahead. But two projects that had been approved by the Tories – Jackdaw, and the Rosebank oilfield – were blocked by the courts who ordered a rethink, and Labour decided to treat them as existing projects, not brand new ones. But that did not mean Jackdaw and Rosebank were automatically going to be approved.
Over the past 12 months or so, largely as a result of high global energy prices, the public and political debate has shifted, and pressure to allow more ongoing North Sea extraction got stronger. Today’s decision did not come as a surprise. But the Rosebank decision will be a much tougher one because its carbon emissions are far higher than Jackdaw’s, and the environmental argument against it is stronger.
In a statement, Andy Burnham described today’s decision as an example of the “pragmatic approach” he wants to take to energy policy. He said:
I welcome the energy secretary’s decision, which will protect hundreds of jobs and help keep millions of homes warm this winter. At a time when people are really struggling, it’s right that we look in a responsible way at maximising the existing energy reserves we have in Britain that could help.
We’re committed to moving towards renewable energy and reaching net zero by 2050. But even on our ambitious climate path, we’ll still require oil and gas as part of our energy needs for decades to come. That’s why we’re taking a pragmatic approach to the North Sea. We’re also establishing a new Energy Wealth Fund to invest in renewable energy, support the green transition and help reduce energy bills over the long-term.
Some Labour figures are alarmed at the decision, but so far there has been very little public criticism of the move from the party’s MPs. The other main parties support Jackdaw going ahead. But the Greens have denounced the decision very strongly. This is from their leader, Zack Polanski.
This is climate vandalism.
Today’s decision by Labour is a betrayal of all of our futures, Labour has abandoned all credibility in the fight against climate change.
The energy secretary has herself said it will make no difference to energy bills; the health secretary has admitted the summer heatwave added to pressure on the NHS, and the industry’s own assessment is that it will create only 27 jobs.
This is a victory for Shell over the people.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Douglas Alexander, the Scottish secretary, is on a visit to a gas terminal in Peterhead to promote the Jackdaw decision.
Noon: Andy Burnham faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
After 12.30pm: Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, is expected to make a statement to MPs about the Jackdaw decision.
2.10pm: Michelle O’Neill, Northern Ireland’s first minister, and Emma Little-Pengelly, the deputy first minister, give evidence to Stormont’s executive office committee.
Afternoon: Burnham welcomes Haitham bin Tariq, the Sultan of Oman, to Downing Street.
I’m afraid we are no longer able to have comments open below the line every day on this blog. If you want to contact me, please email politics.live@theguardian.com. You can use this email to flag up corrections, comments for publication, questions or complaints.
Updated
