3 hours ago
5
Zia Yusuf and Nigel Farage last month. Photograph: Victoria Jones/Shutterstock
Show key events only Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature
Live feed
Reform UK accused by minister of talking ‘utter nonsense’ after Zia Yusuf implies Starmer trying to get Farage killed
Good morning. The Labour conference is over, the Conservative one starts on Sunday, but both parties have got significant policy announcements out today.
-
For Labour, Keir Starmer is announcing government plans to tighten the conditions that apply to asylum seekers given the right to stay in the UK. Provocatively, he says: “There will be no golden ticket to settling in the UK, people will have to earn it.” Rajeev Syal has the story.
-
For the Conservatives, Kemi Badenoch has said the Conservatives will repeal the Climate Change Act if they win the next election. Here is our story, by Fiona Harvey and Helena Horton.
I will post more on these stories as the day goes on.
There is a clear link between the stories: both of them are Reform UK-flavoured, very strongly so in the Tory case (because Nigel Farage would also get rid of the Climate Change Act), but less so in the Labour case (because Farage does not want to tighten conditions for asylum seekers – he basically does not want any of them here at all.) But the Starmer announcement shows that, while the message from Labour conference was that Starmer is now willing to vigorously contest some aspects of Faragism, he is not rejecting it wholesale. He has set out a dividing line – but it is beyond the edge of the territory where migration liberals feel comfortable.
One consequence of the Labour conference is that ministers now feel a lot more confident about clobbering Farage’s party and this morning we saw that from Mike Tapp, the migration minister.
Yesterday Zia Yusuf, Reform’s head of policy, gave interviews arguing Starmer’s attack on Farage in his conference Tuesday put the Reform leader at risk. This was an odd claim from a party that invited the woman jailed for urging people to set fire to asylum hotels to address its party conference as a free speech martyr. Yusuf went even further, though. He implied that Starmer was deliberately trying to get Farage killed. This was an allegation so unhinged that the Guardian ended up covering it in John Crace’s sketch. This is what John wrote about Yusuf’s interview with Wilfred Frost on Sky News.
Yusuf was appalled by Starmer’s speech. It had been vicious, vindictive and inflammatory. An attempt to demonise Nige. As such it had been an incitement to violence. Here was the crux of it. Starmer knew that he couldn’t beat Farage at the ballot box so he was trying to have him assassinated.
“There’s a term known as ‘stochastic terrorism’,” Zia went on. It meant to whip up so much hatred that one supporter takes it on themselves to kill the target. And that was what Starmer had been doing. It was almost certainly the first time the prime minister has been called a terrorist on live news. Time and again, Frost invited Yusuf to back down. To qualify his language. But Zia wasn’t having any of it. Starmer was a terrorist. The one aim of his speech had been to incite someone to kill Farage. Everything else was a smokescreen. Yusuf alone knew the truth. You wonder what he makes of Nige’s speeches.
In an interview with Times Radio, Tapp was asked to respond. He said the claim that Starmer wanted to incite violence against Farage was “utter nonsense”. He went on:
Of course, we want all members of parliament to be safe, and that’s absolutely important, and no-one wants any harm to come to Nigel Farage.
But, look, if we want to say what we want to say, then we’re in our rights to do that, as are they. That’s freedom of speech.
This is utter snowflakery from Zia Yusuf, who claims that we’re diminishing freedom of speech whilst at the same time being allowed to say what he wants.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Keir Starmer is at the European Political Community summit in Copenhagen. Jakub Krupa is covering this on his Europe live blog.
5pm: Kemi Badenoch is doing a round of regional radio and TV interviews, ahead of her conference. Most will be embargoed until 5pm.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm BST at the moment), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Key events Show key events only Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature
Why Tories say they want to get rid of Climate Change Act
This is what the Conservative party says in its news release about why it wants to get rid of the Climate Change Act 2008. Interestingly, the party is talking about “replacing” the act, not just repealing it, but the Tories have not said what they would replace it with.
The party says:
The 2008 legislation has forced successive governments to introduce punitive measures that have hit family finances – including the Boiler Tax which will push up the price of gas boilers to force people to adopt heat pumps just for the purpose of meeting a self-imposed target.
The act ignores the fact that climate change is a global problem. If the British chemicals, cement, or metals industry shuts down and moves abroad to countries with cheaper but dirtier energy, then Britain won’t need any less chemicals, cement, or metals – we will just import more from abroad instead, and lose out on all the jobs, tax revenue, and economic growth. Britain will be poorer and global emissions will increase.
The CCA has also forced ministers to support Drax, where trees are cut down in North America, shipped across the Atlantic in diesel-chugging ships, and burnt in a power station in Yorkshire, at great cost to billpayers and our environment, because it is labelled ‘clean’ for the purposes of our climate targets.
The UK has already halved its emissions since 1990, reducing emissions by more than any other major economy. But global emissions are rising and countries like China are not following our lead. Continuing down this path of unilateral economic disarmament will make us a warning, not an example, to the rest of the world.
The Conservatives support action on climate change – and believe in safeguarding our environment for future generations – but this has to happen when it makes people’s lives better. People should be able to adopt electric vehicles and electric heating when they want to and when it will save them money, not when they are forced to by a government mandate.
Tory plan to scrap Climate Change Act 'backwards step' that would 'damage our economy', says CBI
The Conservatives used to be seen as the party of business. But that relationship was ruptured by Brexit, when the Tories backed a policy seen as highly damaging by mainstream business opinion, and it has not really recovered. There is fresh evidence today because the CBI, a leading business organistion, has said that scrapping the Climate Change Act would be a “backwards step” that would “damage our economy”.
In a statement, Rain Newton-Smith, the CBI director general, said:
The scientific reality of climate change makes action from both government and business imperative. Scrapping the Climate Change Act would be a backwards step in achieving our shared objectives of reaching economic growth, boosting energy security, protecting our environment and making life healthier for future generations.
The Climate Act has been the bedrock for investment flowing into the UK and shows that decarbonisation and economic growth are not a zero-sum game. Businesses delivering the energy transition added £83bn to the economy last year alone, providing high-paying jobs to almost a million people across the UK. The UK’s climate governance and the cross-party consensus that has underpinned it has shaped long-term contracts to deliver renewable energy, investment in green technologies and our international leadership in decarbonisation.
We can debate the pace of transition and how it’s achieved to ensure that decarbonisation does not come at the expense of critical industries. But fundamentally ripping up the framework that’s given investors confidence that the UK is serious about sustainable growth through a low-carbon future would damage our economy.
Stars and stripes flags for Trump UK visit had to be changed for brighter red
Dozens of US flags used for Donald Trump’s unprecedented second state visit to the UK last month had to be replaced because the stripes were the wrong shade of red, a government supplier has claimed, Matthew Weaver reports.
This is what Keir Starmer told reporters as he arrived at the European Political Community summit in Copenhagen this morning.
We’re certainly discussing illegal migration and looking at what further options we can take together.
Obviously, I’ve always argued that working with other countries is always a stronger response. So we’re looking at a number of options there.
There’s a big appetite for it, a number of countries wanting to work with us on what more we can do. So, we’ll be looking at that.
There is also, then, obviously, the question of Ukraine and how we put in more support for Ukraine, put pressure on Putin.
So, it’ll really be migration and Ukraine will be the two dominant issues in the discussions today.
And here is the Downing Street news release put out ahead of the summit, including Starmer’s “golden ticket” comment. (See 9.29am.)
Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters
Reform UK accused by minister of talking ‘utter nonsense’ after Zia Yusuf implies Starmer trying to get Farage killed
Good morning. The Labour conference is over, the Conservative one starts on Sunday, but both parties have got significant policy announcements out today.
-
For Labour, Keir Starmer is announcing government plans to tighten the conditions that apply to asylum seekers given the right to stay in the UK. Provocatively, he says: “There will be no golden ticket to settling in the UK, people will have to earn it.” Rajeev Syal has the story.
-
For the Conservatives, Kemi Badenoch has said the Conservatives will repeal the Climate Change Act if they win the next election. Here is our story, by Fiona Harvey and Helena Horton.
I will post more on these stories as the day goes on.
There is a clear link between the stories: both of them are Reform UK-flavoured, very strongly so in the Tory case (because Nigel Farage would also get rid of the Climate Change Act), but less so in the Labour case (because Farage does not want to tighten conditions for asylum seekers – he basically does not want any of them here at all.) But the Starmer announcement shows that, while the message from Labour conference was that Starmer is now willing to vigorously contest some aspects of Faragism, he is not rejecting it wholesale. He has set out a dividing line – but it is beyond the edge of the territory where migration liberals feel comfortable.
One consequence of the Labour conference is that ministers now feel a lot more confident about clobbering Farage’s party and this morning we saw that from Mike Tapp, the migration minister.
Yesterday Zia Yusuf, Reform’s head of policy, gave interviews arguing Starmer’s attack on Farage in his conference Tuesday put the Reform leader at risk. This was an odd claim from a party that invited the woman jailed for urging people to set fire to asylum hotels to address its party conference as a free speech martyr. Yusuf went even further, though. He implied that Starmer was deliberately trying to get Farage killed. This was an allegation so unhinged that the Guardian ended up covering it in John Crace’s sketch. This is what John wrote about Yusuf’s interview with Wilfred Frost on Sky News.
Yusuf was appalled by Starmer’s speech. It had been vicious, vindictive and inflammatory. An attempt to demonise Nige. As such it had been an incitement to violence. Here was the crux of it. Starmer knew that he couldn’t beat Farage at the ballot box so he was trying to have him assassinated.
“There’s a term known as ‘stochastic terrorism’,” Zia went on. It meant to whip up so much hatred that one supporter takes it on themselves to kill the target. And that was what Starmer had been doing. It was almost certainly the first time the prime minister has been called a terrorist on live news. Time and again, Frost invited Yusuf to back down. To qualify his language. But Zia wasn’t having any of it. Starmer was a terrorist. The one aim of his speech had been to incite someone to kill Farage. Everything else was a smokescreen. Yusuf alone knew the truth. You wonder what he makes of Nige’s speeches.
In an interview with Times Radio, Tapp was asked to respond. He said the claim that Starmer wanted to incite violence against Farage was “utter nonsense”. He went on:
Of course, we want all members of parliament to be safe, and that’s absolutely important, and no-one wants any harm to come to Nigel Farage.
But, look, if we want to say what we want to say, then we’re in our rights to do that, as are they. That’s freedom of speech.
This is utter snowflakery from Zia Yusuf, who claims that we’re diminishing freedom of speech whilst at the same time being allowed to say what he wants.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Keir Starmer is at the European Political Community summit in Copenhagen. Jakub Krupa is covering this on his Europe live blog.
5pm: Kemi Badenoch is doing a round of regional radio and TV interviews, ahead of her conference. Most will be embargoed until 5pm.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm BST at the moment), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Explore more on these topics
