Ex-England bowler James Anderson awarded knighthood in Sunak's resignation list
Former England cricketer James Anderson has been awarded a knighthood in Rishi Sunak's resignation honours list.
Sir James, who retired from test cricket in July having taken more wickets than any fast bowler in test history, is joined on the list by a number of Tory politicians who received peerages and knighthoods.
Former education and housing secretary Michael Gove was confirmed to have been given a seat in the House of Lords after being heavily tipped for a peerage.
Mr Gove, who is now the editor of the Spectator magazine, has served in the cabinet of four prime ministers.
Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor in Mr Sunak's cabinet, and ex-foreign secretary James Cleverly were awarded knighthoods.
There were also knighthoods for former defence secretary Grant Shapps and ex-work and pensions secretary Mel Stride.
Elsewhere, Matthew Vaughn, the filmmaker behind Layer Cake, Kick-Ass, X-Men: First Class, and the Kingsman films was also awarded a knighthood for his services to the creative industries.
Alongside Mr Gove, Mr Sunak made four other former Tory MPs peers – including ex-transport secretary Mark Harper, former chief whip Simon Hart, ex-Scotland secretary Sir Alister Jack and former attorney general Victoria Prentis KC.
Two other senior Tories, former head of the number 10 policy unit Eleanor Shawcross and ex-conservative party chief executive Stephen Massey, were also given peerages.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
26 minutes ago
- Spectator
Hermer admits Nazi comments were ‘clumsy'
As if the Attorney General hadn't proven his ability for conjuring up negative headlines enough, Lord Hermer took it upon himself on Thursday to compare political threats to leave the ECHR to the Nazis. Speaking to the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RUSI) defence think tank, Hermer earnestly told his audience: 'The claim that international law is fine as far as it goes, but can be put aside when conditions change, is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany.' But today, after a momentous backlash, Hermer has finally apologised for his, er, 'clumsy' language. You can say that again! Now Hermer's spokesperson has issued a short statement on the Attorney General's comments, noting brusquely that: He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference. It's hardly a full-throated apology, eh? The row-back comes after the Conservatives and Reform UK politicians alike slammed his remarks – with Nigel Farage fuming that the comments were 'disgraceful' while Tory leader Kemi Badenoch's spokesperson noted that 'it was ironic' that Lord Hermer had said he hoped to depolarise the debate and 'simultaneously called everyone he disagreed with Nazis'.
Powys County Times
28 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Attorney General ‘regrets' comparing calls to leave ECHR with 1930s Germany
The Attorney General 'regrets' remarks in which he compared calls for the UK to leave international courts with 1930s Germany, his spokesman has said. In a statement, Lord Richard Hermer's spokesman said the peer acknowledged his 'choice of words was clumsy' but rejected 'the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'. Lord Hermer has faced criticism for a speech on Thursday in which he criticised politicians who argued that Britain 'abandons the constraints of international law in favour of raw power'. Arguing that similar claims had been made 'in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany', Lord Hermer added that abandoning international law would only 'give succour to (Vladimir) Putin'. He also said that because of what happened 'in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law'. That is the year that Adolf Hitler became German chancellor. The speech prompted Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who has suggested the UK would have to leave the ECHR if it stops the country from doing 'what is right', to accuse Lord Hermer of 'starting from a position of self loathing, where Britain is always wrong and everyone else is right'. In a post on social media, she said: 'The fact is laws go bad and need changing, institutions get corrupted. Our sovereignty is being eroded by out-of-date treaties and courts acting outside their jurisdiction. 'Pointing this out does not make anyone a Nazi. Labour have embarrassed themselves again with this comparison and unless the Prime Minister demands a retraction from his Attorney General, we can only assume these slurs reflect Keir Starmer's own view.' Lord Hermer's spokesman said: 'The Attorney General gave a speech defending international law which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime. 'He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference.' In his same speech to the Royal United Services Institute on Thursday, the Attorney General said 'we must not stagnate in our approach to international rules' and that officials should 'look to apply and adapt existing obligations to address new situations'.
New Statesman
37 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Robert Jenrick is embarrassing himself
Photo by Thomas Krych / Alamy I think when Robert Jenrick closes his eyes he sees an X feed, a long scroll of posts from accounts called things like @Elizabethansexoffender and @Rhodesianringmaster. He's far from the only senior Conservative for whom this is a problem, but this week he has taken the concerns of the online out of the cyberstew and into the real world: specifically, the London underground network. The Shadow Justice Secretary has gone vigilante, and has released a video of himself confronting fare-dodgers on TfL. 'Excuse me, do you think it's alright not to pay?' asks Jenrick, speaking to a figure whose face is a censored blur. 'Seriously, why don't you go back to the barrier and pay', says the 43-year-old MP for Newark, newly Ozempicked into the form of an Inbetweener. Robert Jenrick's view of the UK – which holds that 'across the board the hard reality of mass migration is being covered up' and that we are living in 'Starmer's two tier Britain' – and the way it is informed by online debate cannot be separated out from his lividness about TfL. It is important to note that the version of London in the heads of committed X posters – a place where you can't go to Tesco Metro without being shivved by an asylum seeker living in a palatial council house – doesn't exist. That is not to say, however, that our degraded public realm is not a real problem, or that people who shell out decent amounts of money on transport each week do not feel a real sense of unfairness when they see perennial fare-evasion. Quite apart from the financial hit to TfL, such a sense of living in an unfair world is not good for either individual commuters or for public trust. However, while Tory staffers might think Jenrick is the lone voice saying the unsayable on the issue of fare-dodging, they are wrong. Low-level crime and a public transport system that is worse to use than it once was – in Ken Livingstone's day, signs cautioned to keep noise from within headphones to a minimum! – are problems that all parts of the political spectrum want to address. Striking the right tone with these things is hard, however. Starmer does an alright job, making it clear that he believes there to be no such thing as low-level crime. But (among other things, notably the contemporary party's storied communications issues) New Labour's ASBO-era has given the party a reputation for petty authoritarianism, with Starmer and his 'Respect orders' falling in this hectoring shadow. Jenrick's fellow Tory MP Neil O'Brien has had a pop at it, inveigling against spitting and loud music, and a Bakerloo line that Sadiq Khan has allowed to look 'like 70s New York'. However, his calls to make Britain 'vaguely civilised' have a swivel-eyed quality that, again, is more relatable to the X algorithm than it is to the average member of the public. The person who has struck the right tone on this, however, is Ed Davey. The Liberal Democrats have backed a fine of up to £1000 for people playing music and videos out loud on public transport. Announcing the policy in April, the party's home affairs spokesperson Lisa Smart said: 'Far too many people dread their daily commute because of the blight of antisocial behaviour… Time and time again, I hear from people who say they feel too intimidated to speak up when someone is blasting music or other content from a phone or speaker. It's time to take a stand for the quiet majority who just want to get from A to B in peace.' Without either the problems of being a not particularly popular government or of having pickled their brains on the internet, the Liberal Democrats can sound like really, they mean it. They are successfully selling the idea that they just want Britain to be 'lovely', a place of civic unity and Gail's bakeries. When Ed Davey says he feels your pain – you, in this instance, being someone commuting on the District line to your just-inside-top-tax-bracket job – you believe him. You're a bit cross at someone for fare-dodging, sure, but you're just trying to get on with your day. Jenrick, I assume, imagines that he is the hero of 'silent majority', the one who's doing the right thing for no reward. But manically accosting strangers before making loaded comments about Turkish barbers has only made their day worse. (It has since been revealed that Jenrick had himself been breaking TfL rules by filming without authorisation.) The voter he wants to talk to has moved across the carriage to avoid him. They've sat next to Ed Davey instead. @Elizabethansexoffender's still there though. [See also: Kemi Badenoch is in a hole – and she keeps digging] Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
