Robert Jenrick accuses Zia Yusuf in antisemitic tweet row
The shadow justice secretary said that Nigel Farage's party should give ex-chairman Mr Yusuf 'the boot'.
Mr Yusuf has apologised for the incident, which comes after an anonymous X user posted a video that appeared to show Mr Yusuf liking a tweet attacking Mr Jenrick's wife, who is Jewish.
Since last summer, likes on X have been privatised, so that only the liker and the poster can see them, rather than a wider audience.
In a message posted on X on Friday, Mr Yusuf said: 'One of the team who post to my X account accidentally pressed like on an awful antisemitic tweet earlier today.
'I apologise for this.'
Mr Yusuf said the post in question is 'equally racist against me' and contains reference to 'brown savages'.
'The amount of antisemitism and racism on this platform is spiralling out of control, and I hope that changes soon,' he added.
Mr Jenrick called the apology 'bullshit'.
'The mask has slipped,' he added.
'Likes are private. You thought nobody would ever know. Unfortunately for you, the racist account who posted the tweet and could see the likes exposed you.
' Reform should give you the boot.'
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Mr Jenrick's message was 'well said'.
Mr Yusuf is head of Reform's initiative to drive down local public spending, based on the US's department of government efficiency, also known as Doge.
He was given the position after he quit as party chairman.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘This is not action': MPs respond to David Lammy's condemnation of Israel
When David Lammy stood at the dispatch box to deliver a statement condemning Israel's killing of starving civilians in Gaza on Monday, he was met with anger from MPs. 'We want action, and this is not action,' thundered one Labour MP. 'Is this it?' another questioned. 'At what point does our basic humanity require us to take stronger action? Many of us think the red line was passed a long time ago,' a third said. The fury across the Commons was evident. 'Are words enough?' asked one veteran Tory. A second accused Lammy of 'complicity by inaction' and warned it could land him at The Hague. A Lib Dem highlighted that repeated UK expressions of regret had not prevented further carnage. A clearly despairing Lammy attempted to reassure the politicians the government was playing its part. 'Me raising my voice will not bring this war to an end. I lament that and I regret that. But am I sure that the UK government are doing everything in our power? Yes, I am.' But as international condemnation of Israel over the horrors it is inflicting on starving Palestinian civilians grows, Keir Starmer's government is struggling to convince the British public that it is doing enough. The outrage in the Commons is reflected across the country more widely, with the public increasingly regarding Israel's response since the October 7 attacks as disproportionate, as the atrocities continued. The government have been on the defensive, pointing out that it has restored funding to the UN agency UNWRA, provided millions in humanitarian assistance, sanctioned far-right Israeli ministers and those who committed settler violence, and broken off trade negotiations with Israel. But it has struggled to explain its export licensing regime. Ministers insist they have stopped the sale of arms, despite there still being more than 300 licences in operation. These include, they say, body armour sent to protect NGO workers, chemicals for Israeli universities and components for goods which are then transported to Nato allies. In particular, there is anger at the UK decision to allow the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, which ministers argue is unavoidable because they are part of a global programme over which the UK does not have unilateral control. It exposes serious weaknesses in the regime and some believe the government should go further – with a fuller export embargo and an end to all military co-operation with Israel. Lammy has only recently sought to explain that RAF flights that overfly Gaza do not share information to help Israel conduct the war. 'We are not doing that. I would never do that,' he said this week. Starmer is also under pressure to immediately recognise a Palestinian state, both from his own back benches, within his cabinet and from the wider diplomatic community. Ministers say the UK will 'play its part' in working towards formal recognition, with a UN conference led by the French and Saudis later this month a key moment. Privately, they warn the move would only be symbolic unless there is a ceasefire first. But for many, who think the UK should be matching France's more hardline stance, that is not a good enough reason not to. 'If not now, then when?' one cabinet minister said. The government has stated it could issue more sanctions – with calls to do so against senior Israeli military officers, government ministers and even Benjamin Netanyahu himself. But that has not happened yet. Nor have suggestions it might expel the Israeli ambassador been heeded. 'That's unserious,' said one insider. The UK has also backed away from declaring that Israel has broken international law, insisting that while the government believes it is 'at risk' of doing so, it is up to the international courts to reach that judgment. Aides cite the same reason for avoiding the term 'genocide' to describe the horrors unfolding in Gaza. Back in the Commons on Monday, the criticism kept coming. 'The will of the House is clear on this matter: it wants action, not words. Why are you not hearing that?' a Labour MP asked. 'How could I not?' the foreign secretary responded. But while Lammy may have got the message, he appears to remain restricted by both the caution of the UK prime minister, and the realpolitik that there is only one foreign power that could single-handedly force an end to the conflict: the US. 'I wish we could, but the truth is … we are unable to do that just as the United Kingdom,' he told MPs. 'We have to work in partnership with our allies.' But for many, that will not be enough.
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Old Trafford chaos as Lancashire try to woo India but forget local fans
'Lancashire Cricket is playing its role in supporting bilateral trade talks between the UK and Indian governments.' What does this mean? George Balderson mediating discussions over whisky tariffs? Luke Wells flanking Keir Starmer during his handshake photo op with Narendra Modi? The line appears on the club's website, highlighting an event at Old Trafford in March to welcome a new Indian consulate in Manchester. It's undoubtedly odd but also nothing new. The push to develop Indian ties has been part of Lancashire's story for a while now, the journey beginning at India and Pakistan's clash in the city at the 2019 World Cup. The story goes that their chair at the time, the late David Hodgkiss, observed the passion in the ground and told the chief executive, Daniel Gidney, that Lancashire needed to look east. 'My aim is that, one day, everyone in India will see Lancashire as their second favourite team,' Gidney told ESPNcricinfo in 2020. If that sounds a bit big-hearted, then there is the practical element, too. 'Rooms in our hotel were selling for £3,500,' said Gidney, referring to the Hilton that is part of the ground. So it leads to all of this: Lancashire having its own channel on JioTV, an Indian streaming service; pre-season tours of the country; hosting a networking event in Bengaluru to promote tourism in Manchester; expressing the desire to have an Indian Premier League partner for the Old Trafford-based Hundred team. RPSG, which owns Lucknow Super Giants, was the winning bidder, acquiring a 70% stake in Manchester Originals. This feels like a big week for the county, who do not host a Test next summer and won't receive the substantial injection of a men's Ashes match in two years' time. A contest involving India is the one to capitalise on and another substantial advertisement for those watching abroad. It comes two weeks on from the first women's Twenty20 international held at Old Trafford in 13 years, India beating England by six wickets. Lancashire admitted to disappointing ticket sales for the Test visit of Sri Lanka last year, and rain meant an abandonment of an England-Australia men's T20 in September. Their opportunity to host India four years ago was ruined by a Covid outbreak and a controversial last-minute cancellation, though the England and Wales Cricket Board stepped in to cover ticket refunds. There might have been a brief moment of relief for the club's hierarchy when Chris Woakes sent the ball down to Yashasvi Jaiswal on Wednesday morning. Not that everyone got to see it, as queues outside the ground derailed the arrival of supporters. Lancashire released a statement that tried to shift some of the blame, before admitting the need to change arrangements for the remainder of the Test. 'We are aware that some supporters experienced queues getting into Emirates Old Trafford this morning, which we apologise for,' the club said. 'We saw nearly 9,000 supporters arrive at the ground very late despite encouraging early arrival, with all bags subject to searches on entry. 'The club will be looking at increasing the number of gates for the rest of the Test match. We strongly encourage ticket buyers to only bring bags if required, and if doing so to arrive as early as possible. Gates will be open at 9am for the rest of the game.' Build your brand overseas, but those at home deserve more love, too. Sign up to The Spin Subscribe to our cricket newsletter for our writers' thoughts on the biggest stories and a review of the week's action after newsletter promotion Lancashire supporters may well agree. They do have plenty of things to celebrate this season – an upcoming men's Blast quarter-final, the women's T20 Cup victory, and the enduring presence of Jimmy Anderson – but there has largely been misery in the County Championship. Relegation last season was followed by a dire start this year, with Dale Benkenstein departing as head coach after seven winless games and Keaton Jennings stepping down as red-ball captain. Those who did beat the morning queues might have expected a bit of fire between the two teams: eyeballs, finger-wagging, stump-mic bleeps, the whole lot. After the tetchiness of the previous Test, Harry Brook had talked about England shedding their nice-guy image; Shubman Gill had continued to take umbrage with the hosts' time-wasting. But the morning lacked caffeine and any sunshine to boil tempers. Jaiswal and KL Rahul were watchful, Chris Woakes yearned for an outside edge to carry to the cordon, Jofra Archer stayed economical. Hostility was not the word to use. Maybe they were just playing their roles in supporting bilateral trade talks between the UK and Indian governments.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Policing must be seen to be even-handed
The first of Robert Peel's nine principles of policing, set out as long ago as 1829, is 'to prevent crime and disorder as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment'. The then Home Secretary was responding to the great fear of the authorities in the aftermath of the French Revolution: the mob. Once disorder gets a hold, dealing with it becomes increasingly difficult, requiring recourse to the Army, as happened in Northern Ireland in 1969. The simmering resentment felt in parts of the country about the way illegal migrants have been imposed on communities with no consultation whatsoever is not yet at that level. But as Nigel Farage said this week, we may be on the edge of serious civil disobedience, yet no longer possess the means to contain it. We depend on the police to keep matters under control, though in truth much of the fault lies with the Government. Labour promised that hotels would no longer be employed to house illegal immigrants and yet they are now being used more than ever. In Epping, a hotel has become a target for local protests by people no longer prepared to accept scores of young men being foisted on them. The residents are exercising their rights to object to a set of circumstances over which they have no control and about which they were never consulted. When they hear themselves described as racist thugs they are entitled to feel aggrieved. Essex Police, which has been criticised for the way it has handled days of protests, claims to have been even-handed. But by escorting pro-migrant demonstrators to the hotel, essentially to confront local people, the force's impartiality is open to question. Moreover, it has unwittingly encouraged extremists from the Left and Right to descend on Epping to cause the very trouble the police are meant to prevent. The force must be seen to act in an even-handed way while ensuring the two sides do not end up fighting one another in the streets. No one pretends this is easy but it will require the sort of adept policing that has not been the forte of Essex constabulary, to put it charitably. In the end, the fault lies with the abject failure of the Home Office to find realistic alternatives to hotels for migrants who have crossed the Channel. It is time the ex-military camps, that were once going to be used to incarcerate and process the arrivals, were reopened.
