Zia Yusuf: Reform UK burka row is 'storm in a teacup'
Former Reform UK chairman Zia Yusuf has called a row over a social media post - in which he said it was "dumb" for one of his MPs to call for a burka ban - a "storm in a teacup". Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Yusuf said he regretted the post and that "exhaustion led to a poor decision". Shortly after criticising MP Sarah Pochin, Yusuf quit as chairman saying that trying to get Reform UK elected was not "a good use of my time".However, two days later he returned to work for the party albeit in a different role, leading the party's Doge unit, a team inspired by the US Department of Government Efficiency, set up by President Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
The initiative aims to cut wasteful spending in the councils Reform now controls.Asked why he had resigned as chairman, Yusuf said: "I've been working pretty much non-stop, virtually no days off."It is very difficult to keep going at that pace."He said one of the reasons he had "changed his decision so quickly" and returned to work for the party, was that he had been "inundated" by supportive messages from Reform voters and members.
The series of events began last Wednesday when Pochin, the newly-elected MP for Runcorn and Helsby, asked Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer if he would join France and Denmark in banning the burka, a veil worn by some Muslim women that covers the face and body, "in the interests of public safety".The following day Yusuf, who is a Muslim, posted on X: "I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do".Speaking to the BBC on Monday, Yusuf said "the thing that frustrated me at the time" was that Pochin had not chosen to ask something that was party policy.Asked for his views on a ban, he said: "If I was an MP I would think about it very deeply, I think I probably would be in favour of banning face coverings in public writ large, not just the burka."I'm very queasy and uneasy about banning things that for example would be unconstitutional in the US but we have a particular situation in the UK."He said he did not believe Islam was "a threat to the country" but added that the UK had "a problem with assimilation".
Over the weekend, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch was also asked her views on banning the burka. She told the Telegraph: "People should be allowed to wear whatever they want, not what their husband is asking them to wear or what their community says that they should wear."However, she said that organisations should be able to decide what their staff wear and that she asked people coming to her constituency surgeries to remove face coverings "whether it's a burka or a balaclava". "I'm not talking to people who are not going to show me their face," she added.The Muslim Council of Britain accused her of "desperation" adding: "Kemi Badenoch isn't setting the agenda - she's scrambling to keep up with Reform UK's divisive rhetoric."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
23 minutes ago
- Times
Public will pay price for police funding squeeze, say chiefs
Officer numbers will have to be cut as the public 'pay the price' for the lack of funding for policing in the spending review, police chiefs said. Sir Keir Starmer's pledge to restore neighbourhood policing is 'some way off' they said, after Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, announced that police funding would increase by £2.1 billion between 2026 and 2029 — an average real-terms increase of 1.7 per cent. The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) said this would leave a shortfall of £1.2 billion and lead to forces 'cutting headcount to balance the books'. The Police Federation said the public would 'pay the price', while the Police Superintendents' Association (PSA) accused the government of a 'shameful abandonment of the police service'. Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is understood to be planning to review police funding in the autumn, when she will pressure the chancellor for extra money to meet Labour's pledge to recruit 13,000 police officers. Police chiefs said that without extra funding, the money would have to be found through rises in council tax or cuts to other policing services. Gavin Stephens, the NPCC chairman, said the funding rise would 'cover little more than annual inflationary pay increases' and that progress on the prime minister's key missions, such as halving violence against women and cutting knife crime, would be slower. Sir Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, said police numbers would fall, adding: 'I remain concerned that this spending review could result in insufficient funding for the Met and fewer police officers.' Starmer's promise to recruit 13,000 neighbourhood police officers was one of Labour's flagship policies in last year's general election. Paul Sanford, chairman of the NPCC's finance co-ordination committee, said: 'While we are looking at a 1.7 per cent increase, once pay is accounted for, once our non-pay pressures are accounted for, we think it will be incredibly difficult for the commitment to deliver the additional 13,000 neighbourhood police officers within this funding envelope. 'We've made some progress. We have a good 3,000 already recruited but based on this settlement, that does look a real challenge for us … Certainly we are going to be some way off unless some significant levers are going to be pulled. Any further progress towards the 13,000 without new money would only come from making savings in our budgets.' Sanford said it was impossible to predict what the neighbourhood policing shortfall would be. Labour's initial announcement said the 13,000 officers would comprise 4,000 police community service officers, 3,000 special constables, 3,000 existing officers and 3,000 new police constables. Stephens added that 'the size and shape of the police workforce will inevitably have to change'. He said: 'The amount falls far short of what is required to fund the government's ambitions and maintain our existing workforce. This is against a backdrop of increasing crime rates, with new and escalating threats from organised crime and hostile states, and more offenders being managed in the community as a result of an overstretched criminal justice system.' Sanford said the overhaul of sentencing laws, which will scrap short prison sentences and release some prisoners after they have served just a third of their sentence, would pile further pressure on police budgets. Additional investment in the Probation Service to monitor offenders would take time to phase in, he said, leaving police to deal with the consequences of more criminals on the streets. 'There isn't any additional money to deal with that. This will increase the workload of police officers.' Tiff Lynch, acting national chairwoman of the Police Federation, accused the chancellor of failing to listen to police officers or the home secretary. She said: 'This spending review should have been a turning point after 15 years of austerity that has left policing, and police officers, broken. Instead, the cuts will continue — and it's the public who will pay the price. 'As rank-and-file officers kit up for night duty this evening, they'll do so knowing exactly where they stand in the government's priorities. It is beyond insulting for cabinet ministers to call on police to 'do their bit' when officers are overworked, underpaid and under threat like never before. 'They are facing blades and bricks, managing mental health crises, while battling to protect their own, and carrying the weight of trauma and financial stress home with them every day.' Nick Smart, president of the PSA, said it was a 'shameful abandonment of the police service' and warned that the government was failing in its first duty of keeping public safe. He said: 'Today's funding announcement is a huge blow to the police service, which has once again been placed at the bottom of the government's list of priorities. It is the first duty of government to keep its citizens safe, yet today we see no evidence of a commitment to doing this. 'Many of the government's election pledges centred around a commitment to 'safer streets', promising the public that it would meet ambitious targets such as halving knife crime. Yet the lack of investment announced today means we will continue to struggle to deliver the basics, to maintain officer numbers, cover inflationary costs, cover pay awards and function as we are, let alone move forward on new public safety and transformation initiatives.'
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need
For over five years, Gibraltar has been at the centre of one of the most complex, technical, and geopolitically sensitive negotiations undertaken by the United Kingdom and the European Union since Brexit. The process has consumed me. It has occupied close to half of my time in elected office, taken over almost every waking hour of the last five years, and, in truth, deprived the people of Gibraltar of their Chief Minister in the way they are used to having him, that is, from fixing housing and parking complaints to defending their sovereignty in the international arena. For much longer than I would have wanted, I have been behind closed doors, in physical or virtual boardrooms, working through the details of a document that will shape the next generation of our people. It has been a relentless, exhausting endeavour. Throughout this time, the UK and Gibraltar teams have worked together seamlessly, 'hand in glove', without a flash of daylight between us. We have worked in close partnership with both Conservative and Labour prime ministers and foreign secretaries; from Dominic Raab, Liz Truss and James Cleverly to David Cameron and now David Lammy. What we have negotiated is not the product of fragmented agendas, but the position of a unified British family determined to find a solution worthy of our people. Without a treaty, Gibraltar could be staring down the barrel of a hard border, marked by endless queues, disrupted supply chains, and a deeply uncertain future for many of our businesses. Our hospitals and elderly care homes would face chronic understaffing, and the surrounding region would suffer the almost certain loss of employment for many of the 15,000 cross-border workers who depend on Gibraltar's economy to support their families. The services we deliver to our people would all come under strain. Our public finances would be pushed to the brink. The self-governing Gibraltar we have built would be diminished, replaced by something poorer, more isolated, more inward-looking, and ultimately less able to thrive as a proud, British European Territory. Instead, we now stand at the threshold of something remarkable, and not just for Gibraltar, but also for the United Kingdom, for Spain, and for Europe and our people. Something bold. Something forward looking and hopeful. Something that finally breaks free of the negative inertia that has defined too much of our recent past. Unlocking potential across borders This is politics at its most elevated. The service-led principle of working for our people's benefit and not the performative personal antagonism that too often infects public life. Real, hard graft that overcomes challenges to deliver progress. This is the kind of result our people demand when they voice distrust and decry the political 'establishment'. Our Spanish and EU counterparts, for their part, have brought to the table a seriousness of purpose that also reflects the gravity of the moment. They, too, have recognised that this treaty is not merely about fluidity of movement, but about unlocking human and economic potential across borders. Make no mistake: the treaty that is now within reach is not one that the Gibraltarians have been forced to accept. Our people voted for us to have a mandate to turn our New Year's Eve agreement of 2020 into a UK/EU agreement/treaty. So we say 'yes' to this agreement, but not because we don't know how to say 'no' when we have to. We did so, emphatically, in 2002, when we triggered a referendum to reject Jack Straw's proposal of joint sovereignty with Spain, and I am just as adamant today that this treaty will not in any way compromise British sovereignty over Gibraltar. That will be set out, black upon white, in the treaty when it is published. It is a legal undertaking given by both sides in clear and unequivocal terms. So to be clear: in this treaty we have not ceded any control of Gibraltar to any authority. Just like today, only Gibraltar will decide who enters Gibraltar – exactly as we agreed in 2020 when Dominic Raab was foreign secretary and Boris Johnson was prime minister. This treaty unleashes the potential to usher in a new era. One in which we move beyond the tired narratives of the past on constant sovereignty disputes, towards a future defined by hope, cooperation and shared prosperity. It will pave the way for better jobs, more investment and lasting stability for Gibraltar and the wider region. It can deliver more harmonious human relations and a better quality of life for all our people. When you read it, I ask that you to look up from the pages of this treaty and see that better reality as it peers back at us from the future. This will be the treaty Gibraltar wants. It will be a treaty the UK and the EU can be proud of. And it will be a treaty that will propel us all to the better future politicians are elected to deliver. When the time comes, back Gibraltar and its proudly British people by backing the Gibraltar treaty.
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Fabian Picardo
We have reached this position as a unified British family determined to find a solution worthy of our people
