-copy.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
James Cleverly emotional as he tells MPs of best friend's death
He revealed that his closest friend recently passed away "painfully" from esophageal cancer, after Mr Cleverly spent the final weeks of his life with him.
Mr Cleverly, a leading opponent of the Bill, stated his concerns are practical and not based on faith or ignorance.
He expressed a desire to alleviate suffering but said the Bill, which was voted through with a narrow margin, was not a good enough piece of legislation to pass.
Watch the video in full above.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 minutes ago
- The Independent
Former Salmond staffer rejects Sturgeon claims in book as ‘obviously false'
Nicola Sturgeon's new book contains 'falsehoods at worst, fabrications at best' about her predecessor, Alex Salmond's former chief of staff has claimed. Geoff Aberdein, who worked for Mr Salmond when he was first minister, hit out at Ms Sturgeon, saying: 'I was brought up that you didn't speak ill of the dead. 'But I think if you're going to speak ill of the dead, at least make your claims accurate.' He told the Holyrood Sources podcast that Mr Salmond's widow Moira was 'particularly upset and frustrated at a lot of what has been said' about her late husband, who died suddenly in October 2024. Mr Aberdein continued: 'I think it was important to set out and correct the record not just because Alex is not in position to defend himself, but for myself as well and the series of other officials and civil servants that have contacted me.' Claims that Mr Salmond was the person who leaked the story of the sexual harassment allegations against him are 'obviously false', Mr Aberdein insisted. He said that when his former boss took the phone call to say the story about the allegations was being published by the Daily Record he was actually meeting lawyers to 'draft a legal summons to prevent Nicola Sturgeon's Government from making the allegations public'. Mr Aberdeen said: 'To suggest Alex was simultaneously leaking documents deeply damaging to his reputation whilst at the same time paying lawyers a lot of money to get a court order to prevent publication of the same material is just utterly absurd.' Mr Salmond went on to be acquitted of all the charges against him in a court case in 2020. Mr Aberdein also dismissed claims by Ms Sturgeon that Mr Salmond 'didn't read' the white paper on independence which had been produced by the Scottish government in the run up to the 2014 referendum. In her recently published memoir, Frankly, Ms Sturgeon spoke out about her 'cold fury' with her former leader over his 'abdication of responsibility' on the key document. Mr Aberdein – who said he would not be reading the book – accepted that his former boss 'delegated the responsibility for drafting the white paper to Nicola Sturgeon'. However he insisted: 'To suggest, as I think was the purpose of this story, that he wasn't engaged in the process of a prospectus for independence is utterly nonsense. The former Salmond chief of staff also rejected claims that Mr Salmond was 'apparently against same-sex marriage' – saying that this was 'demonstrably false'. Mr Aberdein told the podcast Mr Salmond had 'declared his personal support for gay marriage for the first time' in a newspaper article in April 2011. And he added that while the SNP election manifesto that year had pledged to consult on the issue Mr Salmond 'chose to come out… excuse the pun, the turn of phrase, ahead of that result, to say that he personally supported it.' With the SNP having won the 2011 Holyrood election, Mr Aberdein recalled 'being in the room with advisors, civil servants and indeed ministers about how we would go about reassuring different sections of our society about that legislation, particularly religious leaders and other civic leaders'. He also made the 'obvious point' that 'if Alex Salmond didn't want legislation to be progressed, he was the first minister of a majority SNP government, it wouldn't have been progressed'. Mr Aberdeen said: 'The point falls down on that alone.'
Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Met Police's use of live facial recognition is 'unlawful', equality watchdog warns
The use of live facial recognition by Britain's biggest police force is 'unlawful' and not compatible with human rights laws, the equalities watchdog has said. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has claimed Scotland Yard's rules and safeguards fall short of standards and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when deployed at protests. Live facial recognition (LFR) is set to be deployed by the force at Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend. More than one million people are expected to converge on the streets of west London for the annual celebration. And Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has already sought to reassure campaign groups that the technology will be used without bias. And a spokesman from the force said it believes its use of the tool is 'both lawful and proportionate, playing a key role in keeping Londoners safe.' The EHRC has been given permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review over LFR, brought by privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo and anti-knife crime community worker Shaun Thompson. They are seeking the legal challenge claiming Mr Thompson was 'grossly mistreated' after LFR wrongly identified him as a criminal last year. EHRC chief executive John Kirkpatrick said the technology, when used responsibly, can help combat serious crime and keep people safe, but the biometric data being processed is 'deeply personal'. 'The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society,' he said. 'As such, there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. 'We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard. The Met, and other forces using this technology, need to ensure they deploy it in ways which are consistent with the law and with human rights.' The watchdog said it believes the Met's policy is 'unlawful' because it is 'incompatible' with Articles 8, right to privacy, 10, freedom of expression, and 11, freedom of assembly and association of the European Convention on Human Rights. Big Brother Watch interim director Rebecca Vincent said the involvement of EHRC in the judicial review was hugely welcome in the 'landmark legal challenge'. 'The rapid proliferation of invasive live facial recognition technology without any legislation governing its use is one of the most pressing human rights concerns in the UK today,' she said. 'Live facial recognition surveillance turns our faces into barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects who, as we've seen in Shaun's case, can be falsely accused, grossly mistreated and forced to prove our innocence to authorities.' 'Given this crucial ongoing legal action, the Home Office and police's investment in this dangerous and discriminatory technology is wholly inappropriate and must stop.' It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended plans to expand LFR across the country to catch 'high-harm' offenders last week. Last month, the Metropolitan Police announced plans to expand its use of the technology across the capital. Police bosses said LFR will now be used up to ten times per week across five days, up from the current four times per week across two days. A Met spokesman said the force welcomes the EHRC's recognition of the technology's potential in policing, and that the Court of Appeal has confirmed police can use LFR under common law powers. 'As part of this model, we have strong safeguards in place, with biometric data automatically deleted unless there is a match," they said. 'Independent research from the National Physical Laboratory has also helped us configure the technology in a way that avoids discrimination.'
Telegraph
4 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Jenrick hits back after Farage labels him a ‘fraud' in row over migrants
Robert Jenrick has hit back at Nigel Farage after the Reform leader accused him of being a 'fraud' over his role in commissioning asylum hotels as an immigration minister. Reform politicians including Mr Farage, the party leader, have posted excerpts from a video from autumn 2022 in which Mr Jenrick, who was then immigration minister, pledged to ramp up the number of hotels for asylum seekers. In a video posted on X, formerly Twitter, Mr Farage said that under the Tories, when Mr Jenrick, now the shadow justice secretary, was responsible for immigration, the number of migrants in hotels hit a record 56,000. Speaking in the wake of a High Court ruling to shut an asylum hotel in Epping following local protests, Mr Farage said: 'He put more people in hotels than even this Labour Government. 'And here we are, three years later, and he turns up [at Epping] and says, 'I'm on your side.' My advice to you would be to say, This man is a fraud. This man is not to be trusted, and certainly his party aren't either.' However, Mr Jenrick rejected the 'nonsensical argument,' where his comments about 'ramping up' the number of asylum hotels were published out of context without taking account of the crisis the Conservative government faced at the Manston migrant processing centre, near Dover. 'The camp in Manston was out of control, complete chaos. In fact there had been an attack on the reception centre at Dover. So we had to do something in that moment to get some of the migrants out, and we didn't want to just let them loose on the streets of Kent,' he said. 'But by the time I left office a year later, when I resigned from the government because Rishi Sunak wasn't doing enough, I had set in train the closure of 100 of those hotels – more than anyone had done previously, more than anyone's done subsequently. 'Why? Because I actually got the number of people coming on small boats down by more than a third. They'd risen massively in the years before then, and they've risen massively since then.' He said he had closed the Bell Hotel in Epping in spring last year, only for Labour to reopen it a year later. 'I don't want to see a single hotel in any community in our country,' he added. 'That's ultimately why I chose to resign from the government, because I thought this was a disgraceful policy, and I was so sick to death of seeing this and the harm that it's causing to communities.' He urged all councils in the country to follow Epping's lead and seek injunctions to shut down asylum hotels and offered, through his office, legal advice for any local authority or community group that wanted to do so. A Tory source said: 'It's absurd. As if Rob wanted migrants in hotels? They seem to have lost their minds in the August heat. 'Perhaps they saw how well Rob polled with their voters and regretted not going to meet the protesters in Epping. The British people want this farce over, not false and petty attacks. 'We need to bring maximum pressure on Starmer to get the law changed, and then deport all illegal migrants. That's what Rob has spent years fighting for – he's not going to stop now.'
