Let the great water clean-up begin
All the same, Sir Jon Cunliffe has done us a favour. Maybe no one really needed such a lengthy treatise to spot that when it comes to water regulation the nation has long been up the creek without a paddle — or that scrapping Ofwat is overdue.
Yet it's useful to see it spelt out so forensically. And with no truck, either, for the old Labour politics of environment secretary Steve Reed: a chap far too focused on sideshow stuff, such as bans on directors' bonuses, rather than a systemic fix for the problem. Cunliffe, a former Bank of England deputy governor, was clear that, given the job ahead, bills will have to rise and companies be able to pay for 'the best people'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Civil Service anti-Islamophobia training led by group who say ‘Islamist' is discriminatory
Civil servants were given anti-Islamophobia training by a group that once claimed the word 'Islamist' was discriminatory. Mandarins at Ed Miliband's Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) took part in an hour-long course in November at a £350 cost to the department. It comes after Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, set up a working group to help her draw up a definition of Islamophobia, despite fears of a chilling effect on free speech. The training session for civil servants was delivered by the Anti-Islamophobia Working Group (AIWG), which claims to be an 'apolitical' coalition of civil society groups and experts. In its report Strategies for Eradicating Islamophobia, published last year, the AIWG argued that referring to 'Islamists' or 'jihadists' could stigmatise all Muslims. It said: 'Public officials should refrain from using terms like 'Islamists' and 'jihadists' when referring to criminals who commit any form of crime, to promote responsible and non-discriminatory language. 'Using these terms to describe criminals can lead to stigmatisation and the unjust association of an entire religious or cultural group with criminal behaviour. Instead, public officials should opt for more precise and neutral language to describe criminal activities. 'By doing so, they can avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes and help maintain a more inclusive, fair and informed public discourse.' The cost and provider of the training session emerged in response to a written question by Kevin Hollinrake, the new chairman of the Conservatives. Michael Shanks, a junior DESNZ minister, said: 'DESNZ is committed to creating a culture where all colleagues feel valued and supported, in line with our 'Inclusive' value.' 'Gravely concerning and warrants urgent action' In response to an earlier question from the Tories, Mr Shanks said the Government 'cannot share the content' of the AIWG workshop because it was given by an external provider. Claire Coutinho, the shadow energy secretary, said: 'It is deeply concerning that DESNZ is not prepared to share the content of this session. 'Without transparency there is a risk that training is embedding deeply contested ideology into the civil service, which is meant to be impartial. 'Frankly, officials' time would be better spent on bringing down the cost of energy bills.' Mr Miliband had vowed to make Islamophobia an 'aggravated crime' in an interview with Muslim News at the 2015 general election when he was Labour leader. In its report last year, the AIWG also heavily criticised Suella Braverman, the former home secretary, over her remarks about the weekly pro-Palestine demonstrations that followed the Oct 7 attacks and the subsequent Israeli bombardment of Gaza. 'The then Home Secretary Suella Braverman branded [the] pro-Palestine demonstrations as 'hate marches', arguably inciting division and emboldening far-Right sentiments,' it said. 'This, coupled with the surge in Islamophobia, is gravely concerning and warrants urgent action.' The group has also pressed ministers to define Islamophobia and appeared to suggest its own definition. 'Islamophobia is a stereotypical and negative perception of Muslims, which may be expressed as hatred of Muslims,' the AIWG said. A committee with 'extreme views' 'It is prejudice, bias, hostility, discrimination, or violence against Muslims for being Muslim or Muslims institutions or property for being Muslim or perceived as Muslim. 'Islamophobia can manifest as a form of racial, religious, national origin, and/or ethnic discrimination, bias, or hatred; or, a combination thereof.' Ms Rayner has appointed a five-strong panel to draw up its own definition to be applied across the public sector despite fears it could prevent politicians speaking up about Asian grooming gangs. The Conservatives have also accused her of appointing a committee with 'extreme' views. The working group is chaired by Dominic Grieve, a former Tory cabinet minister, and is meeting in secret, with members of the public not able to offer their views. Mr Grieve once praised a report published in 2019 which called the discussion of ' grooming gangs ' an example of 'anti-Muslim racism'. A DESNZ spokesman said: 'This spending adheres to EDI guidance published in May 2024 by the previous government. 'We are focused on ensuring every pound spent of taxpayer money delivers for the public.'
The Guardian
17 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘It's like clapping for the NHS': Lionesses' decision to stop taking the knee triggers debate
It has been the most visible symbol of antiracism in sport since athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists in the 1968 Olympics. Taking the knee was adopted by UK football teams in 2020, after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, having been popularised by Colin Kaepernick and his teammate Eric Reid during a 2016 American football game. But amid debate about its effectiveness in 2025, critics of the gesture may have got their wish. After defender Jess Carter revealed racist social media abuse, England's lionesses said they would not take the knee before the Italy fixture, saying football needed 'to find another way to tackle racism', as colleagues and matchgoing fans rallied around her. Meanwhile it's understood the Premier League is planning to talk to club captains about whether to continue with it next season. Piara Powar, executive director of multinational anti-discrimination organisation Fare, has insisted taking the knee remains a 'powerful antiracist act'. But in a Times radio interview this week, the UK foreign secretary, David Lammy, said the time for taking the knee 'has probably passed'. In Lambeth, south London, a historic centre of Black British life, community organiser Ros Griffiths argues the symbol has been stripped of value, because of the persistence of racial inequality and the lack of 'an inclusive national conversation' on British identity in a diverse country. Griffiths said Black sportspeople in the UK find themselves 'part of the in-group when they were winning, and part of the out-group when they're not'. She said: '(Taking the knee is) a bit like clapping for the NHS, it's just symbolic. For me, it's not about taking a knee and putting your fist up in the air. It's about being committed to dismantling systemic racism. 'In my opinion, things have got worse since George Floyd. Look at the race riots last year. And then I think of Diane Abbott being suspended for nothing else other than having an opinion based on her own lived experience of racism. Is that what we're doing in 2025, really? 'This country has benefited from diversity but still doesn't embrace it. What does it mean to be a British citizen? We've not had that conversation, and it has to start with the education system, so people understand the values and the benefits and it's not about the in-group pushing out the out-group, or the out-group trying to push out the in-group. We don't want any more gestures – we're tired of that.' The football anti-discrimination organisation Kick It Out's last incident report found in the 23/24 season, racism remained the most reported form of discrimination, with an 'alarming 47% rise in racist abuse across all levels of the game', and the number of social media racism reports almost tripling. Taking the knee has been questioned by Black sporting figures. In September 2020 coach and pundit Les Ferdinand said 'taking the knee had been powerful … (but) the message has been lost. Months later, then-Crystal Palace forward said he was 'proud to be black, no matter what' but found the gesture 'degrading'. He added: 'Unless action is going to happen I don't want to hear about it.' On the right, Nigel Farage reportedly reacted to the Lioness's decision with predictable glee this week, having previously claimed the knee 'could not be separated from the Marxist BLM political movement'. In 2021 Tory Dominic Raab said it was 'a symbol of subjugation and subordination', before saying BLM protesters had his 'full respect'. While the frequency of Premier League teams taking the knee has reduced with time, it was typically met with more applause than boos at fixtures, as a gesture of respect, solidarity, antiracism and progress within a sport that had been marred by ugly racism towards players and fans in the 1970s and 80s, with supporters including former England manager Gareth Southgate and the Professional Footballers' Association. The FA says it's working with police and social media companies, adding in a statement: 'We are very concerned about the rise in online abuse and discrimination.' The prime minister, Keir Starmer, whose government is developing a social cohesion project, said he stood with players who had suffered racism. The Labour party has said it cannot comment on Diane Abbott's suspension.
Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Iraqi who argued he cannot be deported because he is divorced, wins appeal after legal error
An Iraqi who entered the UK illegally has won an appeal after arguing he cannot be deported because he is divorced. In claims disputed by the Home Office, he said he divorced a 'prominent' politician's daughter and brought 'dishonour' upon their family. The Iraqi said it would breach his human rights to send him back to Iraq because he was at risk of an 'honour feud'. The Iraqi, who was granted anonymity, has won an appeal at an upper immigration tribunal for his case to be reheard after it was initially rejected by the Home Office and lower court. The Iraqi entered Britain 'clandestinely' in 2020 after travelling through Turkey and across Europe before arriving by boat in the UK. He submitted his application for asylum the following day. The court was told that his 'claim for asylum is based upon a claimed risk of being a victim of an honour-based crime'. 'He alleges that he fled Iraq due to threats from his former father-in-law, a prominent and influential politician affiliated with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. 'According to the [Iraqi], he was accused of bringing dishonour upon [his ex-father-in-law's] family by divorcing his daughter,' the court was told. It was accepted that he was married and went through a divorce, but the Home Office 'did not accept that he had experienced problems from his ex-father-in-law'. The Home Office issued a deportation order but the Iraqi, who had a child with his ex-wife, appealed the decision. His challenge was dismissed by a lower tribunal as the judge questioned 'the credibility of the marriage itself'. The First-tier Tribunal said there was a 'disparity in social status' between his ex-wife – the daughter of a powerful politician – and him, a 'minimally educated taxi driver from a marginalised tribe'. A claim by the Iraqi that he had also been the victim of a 'violent' attack linked to the honour feud and stabbed 17 times was dismissed as implausible by the judge, partly because it was 'unsubstantiated' by any medical evidence. The judge said the asylum claim appeared a 'complete fabrication'. The Iraqi appealed to the upper tribunal where the judge Sara Anzani said the lower court was wrong to question the marriage and divorce certificates and said the Iraqi was not given a chance to respond to their doubts. Judge Anzani said: 'These concerns about the reliability and authenticity of the marriage and divorce certificates were not previously raised by the [Home Office], nor were they put to the [Iraqi] during the hearing. 'I find that the Judge's failure to raise his concerns about the authenticity and reliability of the marriage and divorce certificates, concerns not previously identified by the [Home Office], deprived the [Iraqi] of a fair opportunity to address the Judge's doubts. 'The Judge's findings on the marriage and divorce certificates contribute to his overall assessment of the [Iraqi's] credibility, and the ultimate finding that [his] claim was fabricated. 'Consequently, this procedural error is material and permeates the entirety of the Judge's decision'. Judge Anzani concluded that the case must be heard afresh at the First-tier Tribunal again, but not by the previous judge.
