Car park barrier law change 'a step closer' after teen's fall death
Gabriel, who was known for his love of skateboarding, died on 3 October 2020 after spending time with his friends in the city centre. An inquest the following year recorded an open verdict after a coroner heard there was no evidence available to confirm how Gabriel, who was alone at the time, came to fall from the building.
Mr Santer previously told the BBC: "When I went up to the car park I was deeply shocked and saddened to see the height of the barrier Gabriel fell from was actually hip-height."The bill, called the Multi-storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill, was first proposed in Parliament by Maria Eagle, Labour MP for Mr Santer's constituency Liverpool Garston, in 2023. At the time she said that while there was a lack of official data, searches of newspaper reports found at least 17 deaths caused by falls from multi-storey car parks in England across 2022. The bill had been due to move forward but its future was unclear after the general election last July. However Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer confirmed on Wednesday the government would look at the contents of the bill and issue a call for evidence.
Mr Santer said: "Here we are in 2025, and people in my own city are still dying preventable deaths from these falls, these tragedies from car parks that can be so easily prevented, by just applying the legislation we're asking for. "It really is that simple."Mr Santer said he was confident the bill was being taken "extremely seriously at the highest level of government" after meeting Mr Norris. He also called for other families who have lost loved ones in similar ways to get in contact. "It's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned, and it will be for everyone who looks into the issue," he said. "We're not asking for anything other than to keep the most vulnerable members of our communities safe by doing some very rudimentary changes to current legislation."
Listen to the best of BBC Radio Merseyside on Sounds and follow BBC Merseyside on Facebook, X, and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Reeves 'set to raise taxes' to fund Starmer benefits surrender: PM says he is 'pleased' after Labour revolt forces guarantee that NO-ONE will be stripped of handouts
Keir Starmer insisted he was 'pleased' today after caving into a massive Labour revolt on welfare. The PM claimed he had 'listened' in making major concessions to rebels threatening to kill flagship legislation on health and disability benefits. More than 120 MPs had publicly promised to oppose the plans in a crunch vote on Tuesday. But after frantic negotiations - with Sir Keir personally lobbying backbenchers - a deal was announced after midnight, including guarantees that existing claimants will not lose money. The move looks like it could be enough to prevent a disastrous defeat for the government at second reading, although some critics are still vowing to oppose the measures. However, the change on Personal Independence Payment (Pip) is estimated to wipe up to £2billion off the £5billion savings by the end of the Parliament, and Universal Credit tweaks another £1billion. Rachel Reeves was already struggling to balance the books with the economy stalling and the previous £1.25billion U-turn on winter fuel allowance. Speaking on a visit to Wales this afternoon, Sir Keir said: 'We need to get it right. That's why we've been talking to colleagues and having a constructive discussion. We've now arrived at a package that delivers on the principles with some adjustments, and that's the right reform, and I'm really pleased now that we're able to take this forward.' Challenged to explain how the funding would be found, the premier said: 'Well, the changes still mean we can deliver the reforms that we need, and that's very important, because the system needs to be a system that is fit for the future, and this is fit for the future. 'All colleagues are signed up to that, but having listened, we've made the adjustments. The funding will be set out in the budget in the usual way, as you'd expect later in the year.' Ruth Curtice of the Resolution Foundation think-tank suggested the warned she will not be able to find the money in existing budgets. 'That leaves only extra borrowing - which the Chancellor doesn't have much space for unless she were to change her own fiscal rules - or tax rises,' she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Asked if that effectively meant there would be tax rises, Ms Curtice said: 'Yeah. Unless the government were to get better news on the economy the next time the OBR does a forecast... but when we look at everything that's happened in the world since they last did that in March our estimate is that they will actually get bad news from the OBR as well.' Sir Keir and Ms Reeves have both insisted that Labour will stick to the manifesto pledge not to increase income tax, VAT or workers' national insurance. The Chancellor has also been adamant that she will not ease her fiscal rules, after borrowing more at the last Budget to splurge on the NHS, public sector pay and infrastructure. But Downing Street did appear to hint at the possibility of a temporary loosening today. Grilled on how the step would be funded, a spokesman said: 'There'll be no permanent increase in borrowing, as is standard. 'We'll set out how this will be funded at the budget, alongside a full economic and fiscal forecast in the autumn, in the usual way.' Asked whether the Government could say there would be no tax rises to pay for the changes, the spokesman said: 'As ever, as is a long-standing principle, tax decisions are set out at fiscal events.' Challenged how the costs would be covered, health minister Stephen Kinnock told Times Radio: 'The full details around what we are laying out, what I've summarised really today, is going to be laid out in Parliament, and then the Chancellor will set out the budget in the autumn the whole of the fiscal position and this will be an important part of that. 'But forgive me, I'm not in a position to set those figures out now. 'I think that is very much the Chancellor's job as we move into the budget in the autumn.' Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said she believed Labour was in 'a good place now' on the welfare Bill. She told broadcasters: 'We have listened to people, we have engaged with them. 'I think we're in a good place now, alongside the huge investments we are putting in to create the jobs that people need in every part of the country, to get waiting lists down in the NHS, to ensure stronger rights at work, but also to make sure there's employment support for those who can work and protections for those who can't.' Asked whether the Government had created a disparity between existing and new claimants, she insisted it was 'very common in the welfare system that there are protections for existing claimants'. 'That's happened before,' she said. Unveiling the concessions overnight, a No10 spokeswoman said: 'We have listened to MPs who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system. 'This package will preserve the social security system for those who need it by putting it on a sustainable footing, provide dignity for those unable to work, supports those who can and reduce anxiety for those currently in the system. 'Our reforms are underpinned by Labour values and our determination to deliver the change the country voted for last year.' The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit. Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. In her letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said: 'We recognise the proposed changes have been a source of uncertainty and anxiety. 'We will ensure that all of those currently receiving PIP will stay within the current system. The new eligibility requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only. 'Secondly, we will adjust the pathway of Universal Credit payment rates to make sure all existing recipients of the UC health element – and any new claimant meeting the severe conditions criteria – have their incomes fully protected in real terms.' She said a ministerial review would ensure the benefit is 'fair and fit for the future' and will be a 'coproduction' with disabled people, organisations which represent them and MPs. 'These important reforms are rooted in Labour values, and we want to get them right,' she said. The change in Pip payments would protect some 370,000 existing claimants who were expected to lose out following reassessment. Tom Waters, an Associate Director at IFS, said: 'These changes more than halve the saving of the package of reforms as a whole, making the Chancellor's already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder. 'The decision is to protect existing health-related benefit claimants from the reforms, thereby making the savings entirely from new claimants to these benefits. 'This will create big differences – thousands of pounds a year, for many years in some cases – between similar people with similar health conditions who happen to have applied at a slightly different time.' If the legislation clears its first hurdle on Tuesday, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill. The so-called 'reasoned amendment' tabled by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. She said: 'This is a good deal. It is massive changes to ensure the most vulnerable people are protected… and, crucially, involving disabled people themselves in the design of future benefit changes.' While the concessions look set to reassure some of those who had been leading the rebellion, other MPs remained opposed before the announcement.
The Independent
34 minutes ago
- The Independent
46 people arrested at protest supporting banned Palestine Action
Police have arrested 46 people at a protest against Palestine Action being designated a proscribed terror group, the Metropolitan Police said. Protesters gathered for the second week in a row in central London after police reiterated that showing support for the group was a criminal offence. Other demonstrations were also planned across the UK on Saturday, including in Manchester, Cardiff and Londonderry, Northern Ireland, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries, who organised the event. Two groups of protesters gathered underneath both the Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela statues in Parliament Square for the demonstration shortly after 1pm. The individuals then wrote the message 'I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action' with black markers on pieces of cardboard, and silently held the signs aloft as they were surrounded by Metropolitan Police officers and members of the media. Some demonstrators could be seen lying on top of each other on the floor as police searched their bags and took their ID cards and handmade signs. Officers could then be seen carrying away a number of protesters who were lying down, lifting them off the ground and into waiting police vans parked around the square. Other standing protesters were also led away from the statues and placed into the vans. The last of the protesters was lifted from the Nelson Mandela statue shortly after 2.30pm. A Metropolitan Police officer at the scene told the PA news agency that 46 people had been arrested at the protest. The offences mainly related to Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, the officer said. In a post shared on X, Defend Our Juries said the protesters had been arrested 'for holding cardboard signs' and that further arrests had been made at the Manchester demonstration. Scotland Yard said its stance remains that officers will act where criminal offences, including support of proscribed groups or organisations, are committed. The force added that this includes 'chanting, wearing clothing or displaying articles such as flags, signs or logos'. Police arrested 29 people at a similar protest in Parliament Square last weekend. The terror group designation means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. The move to ban the organisation came after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused about £7 million worth of damage. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action, saying that the vandalism of the planes was 'disgraceful' and the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'.
Times
38 minutes ago
- Times
Rescue of UK's biggest bioethanol plant snags on wrangle over CO2
Talks to rescue Britain's biggest bioethanol plant are on a knife-edge after the government offered only a partial bailout focusing on the production of carbon dioxide used in fizzy drinks and to preserve food. Vivergo, which is owned by FTSE 100 company Associated British Foods (ABF), is set to close in two months unless a taxpayer rescue can be agreed. The bioethanol sector fell victim to last month's US-UK trade deal after it emerged that Sir Keir Starmer had agreed to a last-minute White House request to let American firms ship 1.4 billion litres of ethanol to Britain each year, free of tariffs. • Britain's biggest bioethanol plant will shut without state rescue, says AB Foods Vivergo operates from its refinery near Hull by taking feed wheat and converting it into bioethanol and high-protein animal feed. The liquid is blended with other fuels such as petrol to reduce their carbon footprint. E10 petrol, for instance, is 10 per cent ethanol derived from renewable sources. Bioethanol production generates CO₂ as a byproduct. The gas can be captured and used to put the fizz in drinks such as lager or injected into packaging to preserve food. The Vivergo works, which employs 160 people directly but helps support 12,000 growers and other businesses, does not currently generate or supply food-grade CO₂. The government wants the works to be adapted so that it can, following a series of summer crises when stocks ran low. Paul Kenward, chief executive of ABF Sugar, said: 'We're not asking for an open-ended subsidy — ABF is not a company that builds its model around long-term state support for any of our businesses, from Primark to Twinings. 'What we need is a stable, predictable regulatory environment that gives British bioethanol a fair shot. If you lifted our plant and placed it in Rotterdam, we'd be profitable. Why? Because other countries haven't skewed the market against domestic producers. And they haven't, as appears to have happened via the US-UK trade deal, accidentally handed their domestic market to another country.' The government said officials would engage this week with Vivergo and Teesside-based Ensus, another bioethanol producer that is reviewing its future. It said: 'This is an industry that has been facing significant challenges for some time, which is why officials and ministers have met Ensus and Vivergo consistently over the last few months to understand and seek options to address some of the challenges.' • Hopes fade of deal to cut US tariffs on British steel exports Kenward said: 'So far, the government's focus in these talks has been on a narrow financial due diligence process and one particular by-product of bioethanol production: carbon dioxide. CO₂ matters — it is critical to the UK's food and medical sectors. 'But support based solely on CO₂ risks locking us into a future that looks like the past of the UK steel industry: a long-term subsidy regime without a path to growth or profitability. That's not what we want, and it's not what taxpayers will want either.' He added: 'If the government persists with this approach to the talks, Vivergo will, unquestionably, close.'
