logo
It's a love-in at the home affairs committee as Yvette Cooper runs down the clock

It's a love-in at the home affairs committee as Yvette Cooper runs down the clock

The Guardian2 days ago

What goes around doesn't always come around. When Yvette Cooper was chair of the home affairs select committee between 2016 and 2021, she was a force of nature. Tireless. Persistent. Forensic. A one-woman opposition party that the government took seriously.
Yvette pretty much did for Amber Rudd – or rather, helped Rudd to do with herself – as home secretary. Sajid Javid was lucky to escape with a score draw in his appearances before her. Priti Patel merely had confirmed what we all knew: that she was one of the worst home secretaries in living memory.
So you would have imagined that the current home affairs select committee would have wanted to live up to the reputation of its predecessor. To put Yvette through the same level of scrutiny. To make an appearance before them something the home secretary would come to fear. Two hours of her life in which her work at the department would be gone through in fine detail. And found wanting. After all, the Home Office is pretty much guaranteed to break every secretary of state in the end.
Only Cooper appears to be having a charmed life. It's almost as if she had handpicked the committee itself. Mostly Labour MPs from the 2024 intake who appear reluctant to ask the tough questions. As if it might somehow be thought rude to do so. Or it might get back to the party whips that they had been a bit harsh.
It's all a bit of a love-in. New MP Jake Richards's sister is an adviser to Yvette. He may as well have phoned in his questions over a drink or two. Nor are the two 2024 Lib Dems any different. There again, the current Lib Dems are even more enthusiastically Labour than Labour itself. This was the epitome of politesse. Courtly love. As a committee it was almost entirely pointless. Dumb, dumber, dumbest.
The tone was set by Karen Bradley, the committee chair. A kind and gentle woman who appears to have unwittingly made a career as a politician. How this has happened, not even she really knows. She was, briefly, under the previous Tory government, the Northern Ireland secretary. Once in post, she declared that she had had the stunning insight that the Protestants and the Catholics really didn't get on that well. You can't buy that level of intelligence.
To be fair, it's possible that Karen is merely biding her time. Trying to sit out life as quietly as possible, not rocking the boat, while her party indulges its current lunacy. Let Honest Bob and Kemi fight it out among themselves. Sooner or later some kind of sanity must return. Or maybe not. Either way, she's decided she's taking it easy. Time to make friends, not enemies.
We began with something vaguely topical. The arrest of Paul Doyle for allegedly driving into the crowd at the Liverpool parade. But no one had much to say about that. Nigel Farage and Richard Tice might have been bitterly disappointed that he hadn't turned out to be a Muslim or an illegal immigrant, but everyone in the committee seemed quite relieved he had proved to be white and English.
Then we moved on to policing. Which consisted of several MPs trying to name-check their own police forces. You feel that they haven't quite got the hang of this yet. They aren't in the committee room to generate a few soundbites for their constituency newsletters. They are there to interrogate the home secretary on the work of her department. But Yvette was more than happy to indulge the committee in its saccharine agenda. Why stop when you're winning?
This was Cooper in her happy place. It was as if she had dosed up on amphetamines especially for the afternoon. The words rattled out of her mouth at a frightening speed. Not necessarily in the right order. The sentences more or less made sense on their own but were completely unintelligible when collected into a paragraph. The overall effect was hypnotic. Words for words' sake that battered you into morphine dream submission.
In many ways, this was a bravura performance from Yvette. One designed to waste as much time as possible while saying little of interest. In among all the white noise she did commit news once, when she let slip that more children had been referred to Prevent, but that was a rare misstep. She wouldn't let it happen again. This was all about running down the clock.
Ten minutes from the end, Bradley finally noticed that no one had got round to talking about the small boats. Had anyone got anything they wanted to ask about this, she inquired. No one had really. It may be a hot topic elsewhere in Westminster but not here.
Eventually, someone said something about hotels. We didn't even get to discuss the warm-weather excuse that Chris Philp had described as nonsense, even though he had used himself. Was that the time? It was. It was over. Permanent Home Office secretary Antonia Romeo punched the air. She had lasted the entire two hours without saying a word. Civil servants dream of that sort of thing.
Elsewhere, it was another day of Honest Bob out and about on manoeuvres. He is fighting the longest guerrilla leadership campaign in Tory party history. Another pointless TikTok stunt, then off to justice questions, where he once again defended the right of Tory women to encourage people to burn down hotels with migrants in them. No compassionate conservatism for him.
But for outright stupidity, we must ask for the shadow Defra secretary, Victoria Atkins, to take a bow. Vicky had won an urgent question from the Commons speaker to ask Steve Reed about Thames Water. A scenario that even she couldn't screw up. Except she could. Vicky wondered if the reason KKR had pulled out of the deal was because Reed had said a few mean things about them at the weekend. This is what passes for scrutiny from the opposition these days.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

England Lionesses announce squad for Euro 2025 after Sarina Wiegman was rocked by THREE withdrawals days before
England Lionesses announce squad for Euro 2025 after Sarina Wiegman was rocked by THREE withdrawals days before

The Sun

time44 minutes ago

  • The Sun

England Lionesses announce squad for Euro 2025 after Sarina Wiegman was rocked by THREE withdrawals days before

ENGLAND manager Sarina Wiegman has named her 23-player squad for Euro 2025 as the Lionesses prepare to defend their title. Three years on from their first-ever European Championship triumph, the Lionesses head to Switzerland next month as one of the favourites. 3 3 But they will be missing three key players who contributed to that incredible Wembley success. Millie Bright, who captained the squad at the 2023 World Cup, made herself unavailable for selection earlier this week due to burnout. Fran Kirby announced her retirement from international football on Tuesday after learning that she would not be travelling to Switzerland. And goalkeeper Mary Earps hung up her gloves last month in a huge shock to both Wiegman and her team-mates. Despite the absences, England approach the European Championship next month with a strong squad. Leah Williamson will captain the Lionesses for the second time at a major tournament. She will be joined by defenders Lucy Bronze, Alex Greenwood, Maya Le Tissier, Esme Morgan, Jess Carter, Niamh Charles and Lotte Wubben-Moy. Following the departure of Earps last month, Hannah Hampton will be England's No1 this summer. Khiara Keating and Anna Moorhouse will be on hand in case the Chelsea ace gets injured. Georgia Stanway returned to the England squad last week following a five-month period on the sidelines with a knee injury. England Lionesses star hints at future career change as she shows off talent as a tattoo artist 3 She is among the list of midfielders included, alongside the likes of Keira Walsh, Ella Toone, Grace Clinton and Jess Park. And in attack, Wiegman has picked Alessia Russo, Aggie Beever-Jones, Lauren Hemp, Beth Mead, Chloe Kelly and 19-year-old Michelle Agyemang. Despite being sidelined with a hamstring injury, Lauren James has also earned a call-up for the tournament. Out of the 23-player squad, 13 were part of the Lionesses' Euro 2022-winning squad at Wembley. Meanwhile, seven players will be appearing at their first major tournament.

Illegal immigrant can stay in UK for daughter he does not speak to
Illegal immigrant can stay in UK for daughter he does not speak to

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Illegal immigrant can stay in UK for daughter he does not speak to

An asylum judge allowed an illegal immigrant stay in Britain despite ' contradictory findings ' that his relationship with his daughter was good – but had also broken down. Andrew Kung'u Gichuhi, from Kenya, won his appeal to remain in the country, with a new hearing pending, after an immigration judge said Mr Gichuhi could stay in the UK because he had a 'genuine and subsisting' relationship with his daughter, and it would not be right to expect her to leave Britain. But, later on in her judgment, she appeared to contradict her earlier comments, saying there had been a breakdown in the father-daughter relationship. After the Home Office argued that her findings were 'irrational', an upper tribunal judge has now ruled that Mr Gichuhi's claim should be heard again. The case, disclosed in court papers, is the latest example uncovered by The Telegraph in which illegal migrants or convicted foreign criminals have been able to remain in the UK or halt their deportations on human rights grounds. 'Irrational' ruling Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, has announced plans to kerb judges' powers to block deportations with new 'common sense' rules to clarify how they interpret the Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) article eight, which provides the right to a family life. The Home Secretary's rules are also intended to strengthen the public interest test, in which courts need to be hold themselves accountable and only grant exceptions to laws with justified reasons. Mr Gichuhi was living in the UK illegally as an unmarried partner of a British national when he applied for citizenship. The Home Office rejected his application, arguing that there were 'no insurmountable obstacles to family life with his partner continuing in Kenya'. The Home Office said he did not have a 'genuine and subsisting' relationship with his daughter, from a previous marriage. Mr Gichuhi appealed the decision to a lower-tier tribunal. The unnamed judge found that there was a 'genuine and subsisting' parental relationship between Gichuhi and his daughter, who 'could not reasonably be expected to leave the United Kingdom'. But later in the judgment, she said the relationship was 'broken down' and that there was 'no contact' between the Mr Gichuhi and his daughter. In the appeal against the 'irrational' finding, the Home Office said 'a relationship could not be both genuine and subsisting and broken down'. It added the judge had also been 'speculating about the possibility of future contact'. Those representing Mr Gichuhi argued that the judge had been 'entitled' to find that the relationship was subsisting, because he sent £100 a month to his daughter's bank account. They said he sent the money on an 'entirely voluntary basis', and his daughter had not returned the money. However, while they argued that a relationship could be 'genuine and subsisting' in 'the absence of contact', they accepted that 'subsisting was the antithesis of broken down'. For this reason, Mr Gichuhi's lawyers accepted that the judge's position was 'at least contradictory' and she had not explained how 'the contradictory positions were reconciled'. Upper Tribunal Judges Adrian Seelhoff and Sean O'Brien concluded: 'Consequently, the judge's finding at that [Mr Gichuhi's] relationship with his daughter had 'broken down' is inconsistent with her finding later in that paragraph that it was 'subsisting'. 'No attempt had been made to reconcile these contradictory findings. It follows that the judge's decision involved the making of an error of law.' They ruled that the case must be reheard afresh by another judge.

Mum who abused son so badly he had to have his legs amputated to be freed early from prison
Mum who abused son so badly he had to have his legs amputated to be freed early from prison

Sky News

timean hour ago

  • Sky News

Mum who abused son so badly he had to have his legs amputated to be freed early from prison

A mother who abused her child so badly he had to have his legs amputated is to be released early from prison. Jody Simpson and Anthony Smith were both jailed for 10 years in 2018 for torturing their son, Tony Hudgell, who is now 10. He was just 41 days old when he was assaulted by the pair and left untreated and in agony for 10 days. The attack caused multiple fractures, dislocations and blunt trauma to the face, leading to organ failure, toxic shock and sepsis. The damage meant both his legs had to be amputated. Simpson was due to be released on licence at the halfway point of her prison sentence in August 2022. However, then justice secretary Dominic Raab referred her case to the Parole Board and her release was put on hold. A spokesperson for the Parole Board on Wednesday confirmed Simpson was set to be released. Paula Hudgell, Tony's adoptive mother, criticised the decision in a social media post. "Tony has life long injuries every day he suffers due to her hands," she wrote on X. Tony's case led to a public outcry and calls for child abusers to be given life behind bars. Tory MP Tom Tugendhat, who led a campaign for the changes, which are also known as Tony's Law, said on X: "I'm backing Tony as he faces the early release of his abuser - his birth mum. "Tony lives every day with the pain caused by her crimes as a baby. We must do more to protect children like him." Tony has since gone on to be a successful fundraiser for charity - for which he has been honoured by the Royal Family. A statement from the Parole Board said: "We can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board has directed the release of Jody Simpson following an oral hearing. "Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community. "A panel will carefully examine a huge range of evidence, including details of the original crime, and any evidence of behaviour change, as well as explore the harm done and impact the crime has had on the victims." It added: "Parole reviews are undertaken thoroughly and with extreme care. Protecting the public is our number one priority." A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: "This was a horrific crime that saw Tony Hudgell mercilessly tortured by his birth parents and our thoughts remain with him and his loved ones. "Now that the independent Parole Board has directed her release, Jody Simpson will be subject to strict supervision and licence conditions. She faces an immediate return to prison if she breaks the rules."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store