Keir Starmer 'is a Unionist' insists official spokesman after PM ducks question
The Prime Minister refused to say whether he was a Unionist when asked by a Northern Irish MP during PMQs on Wednesday.
"Of course" Keir Starmer is a Unionist despite avoiding the question in the House of Commons, his official spokesperson has said.
The Prime Minister had refused to say whether he was a Unionist when asked by a Northern Irish MP during PMQs on Wednesday.
But his official spokesperson confirmed that Starmer wants Scotland and Northern Ireland to remain in the United Kingdom.
When asked after PMQs if Starmer is a unionist, his official spokesperson said: "I think the Prime Minister said before that, of course, he is the Prime Minister for the whole of the UK, including in Northern Ireland."
When pushed if he was a Scottish Unionist but not a Northern Irish Unionist, the spokesperson said: "The Prime Minister if of course Prime Minister for the entire United Kingdom.
"So of course he is a Unionist."
Starmer had been asked by Ulster Unionist Party MP Robin Swann to restate his commitment to unionism during Prime Minister's Questions.
Swann said: 'Could he speak to his Northern Ireland team about their understanding of the Belfast Good Friday Agreement, because the Secretary of State in an interview seemed to think that it had been negotiated by Ian Paisley rather than David Trimble and my party?
' His Northern Ireland minister has said at the start of this week that the future of Northern Ireland as part of the union is dependent on opinion polls, and she wasn't sure if she was a unionist.
"Can the Prime Minister confirm to me his understanding of the principle of consent, and confirm to this House that he is a unionist?'
But Starmer refused to say that he is a unionist.
He instead paid tribute to politicians who put together the Good Friday Agreement.
' I absolutely stand four square behind the principles, some of which I was doing my part to help implement when I was working in Northern Ireland, they will always drive me on the issues that he raises with me,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
How can ‘sanction' mean two opposing things?
Sir Keir Starmer said 'he could 'not imagine' the circumstances in which he would sanction a new referendum' on Scottish independence, the Times reported the other day. The Mirror said Amazon 'has agreed to sanction businesses that boost their star ratings with bogus reviews'. So we find sanction being used with completely opposite meanings: 'give permission' and 'enact a penalty to enforce obedience to a law'. The latter sense was extended after the first world war to cover economic or military action against a state as a coercive measure. That is the use we daily find applied to action, or the lack of it, against Russia. The diverging meanings both go back to the Latin noun sanctio, deriving from the verb sancire 'to render sacred', hence 'inviolable'. Such a sanctio came to mean a decree, as in that obscure beast of history, the pragmatic sanction, which looks neither pragmatic or like a sanction. The phrase had a good run for its money, though, labelling a decree attributed to St Louis of France against the Papacy in 1268 and a decree by Charles III of Spain in 1759, granting the crown of the Two Sicilies to his son. I would describe as an anxiety dream the thought of having to write about either. Here, pragmatic meant 'to do with affairs of state', a development of the ancient Greek word that, via Latin, also gives us practical. In English pragmatic acquired the meaning 'practical' only in the mid 19th century, allowing the Americans C.S. Peirce and William James to harness pragmatism to describe a kind of philosophy. As for sanction, it is now also deployed to label the removal or reduction of social benefits. In February this year, 5.5 per cent of claimants were being sanctioned. There is, too, the architect of Dublin's Heuston station (often misprinted as Euston station): Sancton Wood (often misprinted as Sanction Wood).
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Chancellor unveils £6bn NHS funding after health-centred spending review
Some £6 billion will be spent on speeding up testing and treatment in the NHS, Rachel Reeves has announced, after she placed the health service at the heart of Government spending plans. The Chancellor unveiled the investment, which includes new scanners, ambulances and urgent treatment centres aimed at providing an extra four million appointments in England over the next five years, after Wednesday's spending review. The funding is aimed at reducing waiting lists and reaching Labour's 'milestone' of ensuring the health service carries out 92% of routine operations within 18 weeks. In the review, Ms Reeves set out day-to-day spending across Government for the next three years, as well as plans for capital investment over the next four years. The NHS and defence were seen as the winners from the settlement, as both will see higher than average rises in public spending. This comes at cost of squeezing the budgets of other Whitehall departments and experts have warned tax rises may be needed later this year. The Chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer both sought to portray the review as a 'new phase' for the Government, following the criticism Labour has faced during its first year in power, including over cuts to winter fuel allowance. Ms Reeves claimed the NHS had been 'put on its knees' as a result of under-investment by the previous government, adding: 'We are investing in Britain's renewal, and we will turn that around.' The new £6 billion investment will come from the capital settlement for the NHS and will also help to speed up diagnoses with scans and treatment available in places such as shopping centres and high streets. The scale of day-to-day spending for the NHS is akin to an extra £29 billion a year. In a broadcast interview on Wednesday evening, Ms Reeves said the Government was 'confident' it could meet its pledge to reduce waiting lists after the boost to NHS spending. But while health and defence have benefited from the review, the Home Office, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Department for Transport and Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are all in line for real-terms cuts in day-to-day spending. The Foreign Office is also in line for real-terms cuts, mainly as a result of a reduction in the overseas aid budget, which was slashed as part of the commitment to boost defence spending to 2.6% of gross domestic product – including the intelligence agencies – from 2027. Ms Reeves acknowledged 'not everyone has been able to get exactly what they want' following Cabinet squabbling over departmental budgets. She said 'every penny' of the spending increases had been funded through the tax and borrowing changes she had announced in her first budget. The Chancellor also insisted she would not need to mount another tax raid to pay for her plans, but experts warned the money for the NHS might still not be enough and the Government is under international pressure to boost defence funding further. Paul Johnson, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, described the hospital waiting times target as 'enormously ambitious', adding: 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' At a summit later this month Nato members will consider calls to increase spending to 3.5% on defence, with a future 1.5% on defence-related measures. Steven Millard, interim director of the NIESR economic research institute, said the Chancellor's non-negotiable fiscal rules, coupled with the 'small amount of headroom' in her spending plans, meant 'it is now almost inevitable that if she is to keep to her fiscal rules, she will have to raise taxes in the autumn budget'. Elsewhere, policing leaders warned forces may need to make deep cuts after their settlement was announced. The spending review provides more than £2 billion for forces, but ministers have acknowledged some of that 'spending power' will come from council tax hikes.
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer doubles down on Israeli ministers' sanctions despite being slammed by US
SIR Keir Starmer yesterday doubled down on sanctioning Israeli ministers, despite being savagely rapped by the US. Donald Trump 's administration hit out at Britain after the PM broke with tradition and imposed a travel ban and asset freeze on two far-right members of Israel's government, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. 4 4 4 In a scathing attack on the move, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the sanctions 'do not advance American efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home and end the war'. Mr Rubio warned Britain 'not to forget who the real enemy is'. The US ambassador to the UK said he 'fully supported' Mr Rubio's slap down and warned the PM against 'impeding constructive dialogue'. Ben-Gvir, who is pushing to annex the West Bank and wants to permanently expel Palestinians from Gaza, said: 'The American administration is a moral compass in the face of the confusion of some Western countries that choose to appease terrorist organizations like Hamas. 'Israel is not afraid — we will continue to fight terrorism. 'History will judge the Chamberlains of our time.' At PMQs Sir Keir defended the sanctions as a bid to 'uphold human rights and defend the prospect of a two-state solution'. The PM said: "Acting alongside our allies, we have sanctioned individuals responsible for inciting appalling settler violence and expansion. "We will continue to support all efforts to secure a ceasefire, the release of all hostages despicably held by Hamas and the humanitarian aid that needs to surge in. Greta Thunberg's Gaza 'Freedom Flotilla' boarded & seized by Israeli forces 4
