Starmer faces further calls to sack his Attorney General
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp argued Lord Hermer should be fired for having 'appalling judgment'.
In the Commons, Mr Philp drew a comparison between a man who was given a sentence of 28 months for rape, and Lucy Connolly who received 31 months for inciting racial hatred in the aftermath of the Southport terror attack.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp argued Lord Richard Hermer had 'appalling judgement' and should be fired (Jonathan Brady/PA)
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has also said the Prime Minister should sack Lord Hermer, arguing he 'believes in the rule of lawyers, not the rule of law'.
This came after Lord Hermer was criticised for a speech in which he appeared to compare calls for the UK to leave international courts with 1930s Germany.
Lord Hermer's spokesman said the peer regretted his remarks and acknowledged his 'choice of words was clumsy', but rejected 'the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'.
Speaking during Home Office questions, Mr Philp said: 'It emerged yesterday, that the Attorney General, Lord Hermer, chose not to refer a man given just 28 months for rape for a longer sentence under the unduly lenient sentencing scheme, which the Attorney General can do.
'Yet, Lucy Connolly got more prison time for a tasteless tweet. Why does Lord Hermer think rape is less serious than Twitter comments?
'This is two-tier justice in action, and doesn't this show Lord Hermer has appalling judgment, and the Prime Minister should fire him?'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper replied: 'This is from a former policing minister who… under his government, saw the charge rates for rape plummet, saw the charge rates for domestic abuse plummet, and saw the charge rates for crime drop substantially.
'This Government is supporting much stronger action on violence against women and girls because we recognise the serious damage that these crimes do.
'Shamefully, the previous government left us with a shocking legacy on crime, on immigration, across the board. This Government is turning that round.'
Conservative MP Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) later said: 'The Home Secretary was asked a question about Lord Hermer of Chagos, as perhaps he ought to be known. Why didn't she answer it? And will she do so now?'
Ms Cooper replied: 'Lord Hermer does not decide sentencing. He has a particular role as the Attorney General that (Sir Julian)… as a very experienced member of this House, will know the way in which the system works.'
Sir Keir has previously defended the sentence of Lucy Connolly, who on the day of the murder of three children by Axel Rudakubana in Southport, posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.'
At Prime Minister's Questions last week, Sir Keir said he is 'strongly in favour of free speech', but is 'equally against incitement to violence against other people'.
Elsewhere in Home Office questions, Conservative former minister Graham Stuart accused the Government of putting its electoral motives ahead of the needs of victims of grooming gangs.
The MP for Beverley and Holderness said: 'Senior figures in the Catholic Church and the Church of England were found to have conspired to cover up child abuse by priests.
'Senior figures in the Labour Party are now opposing local inquiries in places like Bradford, London and Wales, and ministers here oppose a national rape inquiry.
'We've also heard from a former member of this House, Simon Danczuk, Labour member of Parliament, that he was told not to raise this issue of the ethnicity of some of the perpetrators.
'When will Labour put aside its electoral interests and stand on the side of the abused?'
MPs from the Labour benches could be heard shouting 'shame on you' in response to the question.
Home Office minister Jess Phillips replied: 'I think that the idea that I have ever, or in fact the Prime Minister of this country has ever, put anything other than the interests of the victims of grooming gangs at the heart of everything that we have ever worked for, is frankly for the birds.'
Ms Phillips said the number of arrests had increased, adding: 'We will continue to pursue these violent, abusive, vicious, abusers through the courts, through justice and I will continue to take my counsel not from him, but from the victims.'
Mr Danczuk stood as a Reform UK candidate in a by-election last year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
33 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Questions over council spending on Friars Walk Newport
The local authority negotiated a deal with the owners of Friars Walk in 2017 that would top up income if the centre was not collecting enough rent. Payments in each of the past six financial years have reached the maximum £500,000 – new figures seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service show. Cllr Matthew Evans, the leader of the Conservative opposition group, said he was 'absolutely staggered that the council has squandered over £3.56 million of local taxpayers' money on this'. A council spokesperson defended the deal and said the local authority would still benefit overall from the deal, even if the maximum £500,000 was paid out annually over the course of the 15-year deal. The council received £8 million when it signed the deal, and would be liable to pay a maximum of £7.5 million in top-ups, they explained. 'It is important to note that as well as the rental subsidy, the arrangement ensures that the council receives additional rent payments if the centre's profits exceed certain thresholds,' the spokesperson added. But Cllr Evans said the deal to top up low rents involved money which could be better spent on council services. 'Think how many additional social service staff could have been employed, or potholes fixed,' he said. 'I seem to recall when I questioned the decision taken by the cabinet at the time, I was told that it was merely 'an insurance policy' which would never be called on. 'Sadly the public have been picking up the tab for Labour's failure to regenerate the city centre. The reopening of the former Debenhams site is good news, but more needs to be done and fast.' A homeware store is reportedly set to open in part of the former Debenhams premises, which was described as the anchor tenant for the Friars Walk centre. Debenhams' high-street operations ceased in 2021 and the future of the large Newport site has been uncertain until the recent news of an incoming tenant. Michael Enea, a Conservative Party campaigner and political blogger, has urged the council to consider what he called 'huge' business rate charges for larger premises in the city centre. 'The former Debenhams site at £345,000 a year, the old Cineworld complex is £64,500 a year – these are astronomical figures,' he said. 'No wonder vast swathes of businesses have moved to out-of-town retail parks. We need a total review of business rates in Wales whereby it becomes an incentive to trade in our town and city centres. Something has to change.' The local authority spokesperson said Newport City Council is not responsible for setting business rates. 'We do, however, offer support for small and medium-sized city centre businesses through our local city centre rate relief scheme, which offers a discount of 25% on non-domestic rates for qualifying properties,' they explained. 'Very small businesses already receive rate relief through the Welsh Government's small business rate relief scheme. 'The Welsh Government also offers support for larger businesses through its retail, leisure and hospitality relief scheme, which offers a discount of 40 per cent on non- domestic rates, capped at £110,000 per business.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Immigration warning over 'less than welcoming' statements
The tone of Sir Keir's remarks on May 12 was, as observed by Mr Sheerin and many others, surely something of a surprise. And it was unexpected even with an awareness - having covered this key issue closely over months and years - of Labour's developing and lamentable stance on immigration. The Prime Minister declared: 'Nations depend on rules – fair rules. Sometimes they're written down, often they're not, but either way, they give shape to our values. They guide us towards our rights, of course, but also our responsibilities, the obligations we owe to one another. Now, in a diverse nation like ours, and I celebrate that, these rules become even more important. Without them, we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.' The 'island of strangers' was a striking turn of phrase. Sir Keir went on: 'So when you have an immigration system that seems almost designed to permit abuse, that encourages some businesses to bring in lower-paid workers rather than invest in our young people, or simply one that is sold by politicians to the British people on an entirely false premise, then you're not championing growth, you're not championing justice, or however else people defend the status quo. You're actually contributing to the forces that are slowly pulling our country apart.' Maybe with the benefit of hindsight the Prime Minister's remarks, even though they could have been uttered just as easily by the Tory Brexiters, should not have been quite so much of a shock as they were. After all, Labour has embraced the key elements of the Conservatives' hard Brexit: loss of free movement of people between the UK and European Economic Area nations and the ending of the frictionless trade from which the country previously benefited enormously when it was part of the single market. Nevertheless, Sir Keir's tone was surely surprisingly dismal, even given all of this. Not only did we have the reference to 'an island of strangers' but also this declaration: 'This strategy will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics, our economy, and our country.' What seemed clear from Sir Keir's utterings was that populism most certainly did not end with the exit of Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak from the prime minister post. Sir Keir's tone contrasted so starkly with Mr Sheerin's reasoned appraisal of the Prime Minister's remarks and Labour's plans on immigration. We had this from Sir Keir: 'We do have to ask why parts of our economy seem almost addicted to importing cheap labour rather than investing in the skills of people who are here and want a good job in their community. Sectors like engineering, where visas have rocketed while apprenticeships have plummeted.' You would imagine Mr Sheerin, as a veteran of the engineering sector, knows a lot more about the specifics than Sir Keir. And it is worth observing the Scottish Engineering chief executive is passionate about people in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK being trained as engineers. He would love to see the skills shortages which are posing such a challenge to member companies of Scottish Engineering and others in the sector solved. Mr Sheerin is not a politician - just someone with deep knowledge of the Scottish engineering sector. So what did the Scottish Engineering chief have to say in his quarterly report published on Friday? Read more He declared that he found the UK Government's 'latest pronouncements on immigration disappointing', highlighting the detrimental impact on companies of 'statements that feel less than welcoming'. Mr Sheerin hammered home his view that raising minimum qualification levels from Higher equivalents to degree level would 'leave out the skilled trades and crafts roles where we are already in shortest supply: welders, fabricators, electricians, pipefitters, CNC (computer numerical control) machinists to name a few'. That is surely a crucial point. And it is worth emphasising Mr Sheerin's observation that people skilled in these roles are 'already in shortest supply'. Mr Sheerin also noted: 'The shortening of the graduate visa scheme reducing the right to work from two years to 18 months after graduating will not only hit our education sector but also reduce the attractiveness of the scheme for companies who will have a shorter timeline to decide whether to invest in the process to extend the visa of the employee.' This is another good point. And the Scottish Engineering chief executive declared: 'Whilst I recognise that this [immigration] is a contentious political issue across the UK for a whole range of reasons, in engineering and manufacturing in Scotland the reality is that immigration is a vital source of skills and experience that cannot be replaced overnight. These skills levels take years to build - and we should be building them - but closing off the supply before putting in place the actions to do that is another example of an action that will challenge the stated ambition of growing our economy.' The time horizon with regard to building skills levels is important. It might not chime with that of politicians such as Sir Keir, who seems at pains to bang the drum on immigration as Nigel Farage's Reform UK makes a big noise on this front. However, it is a simple factual point that engineering skills do take years to build. Mr Sheerin declared that a frustration for him in Labour's immigration pronouncements was that 'whereas there is considerable detail on how we plan to restrict and close this supply of skills, on the laudable stated aim that we will replace the loss with trained or upskilled UK-born workers, the detail is missing on how that will be achieved'. He added: 'And there is no detail that recognises that engineering skills take between four and six years to get to a starting level of competency. It does not seem an unreasonable request for the get-well plan to carry at least the same level of detail as the take-it-away plan.' This seems like an absolutely fair summation of the problems with Labour's populist immigration proposals. If you were asked to choose whether you think it is Sir Keir or Mr Sheerin who is on the money in relation to immigration policy and its effect on engineering and the broader economy, it would surely be the easiest of questions to answer, any day of the week.
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Anas Sarwar should not expect to oust John Swinney yet, says polling guru
John Curtice said the battle for the South Lanarkshire seat always looked as if it would be a close affair and that's how it turned out. Anas Sarwar should not expect to oust John Swinney as first minister just yet despite Labour's success at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, Professor John Curtice has said. The election guru said the battle for the South Lanarkshire seat always looked as if it would be a close affair and that's what happened. The Strathclyde University academic told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'If you take in the opinion polls, what's happened in Hamilton, and the ups and downs in Labour and SNP support since 2021, we see Labour at 31 per cent and the SNP at 31 per cent. 'So the contest always looked to be close and that's what's been proven in the end. Labour has done slightly better and the SNP slightly worse, but there is nothing in the result to suggest Labour has turned around the polls. 'But equally what's true is there are no signs in this result that the SNP are making much progress in reversing the losses from last year. 'The recent message from opinion polls are the SNP is running at just over 30 per cent, Labour is around 20 per cent, so it seems a reasonable expectation that such a result would not mean Anas Sarwar is Scotland's next first minister.' Curtice also said that the by-election was positive for Reform, even though it came third after some pundits predicted it could finish higher. Nigel Farage's party took 26.2 per cent of the vote - well above the 19 per cent it is sitting at in the national polls for Scotland. Writing in The Times, he said: 'Once again it is Reform's political prospects that now look brighter. 'As in the English local elections, so in Hamilton the party outperformed its current standing in the polls, winning as much as 26 per cent of the vote. 'Hitherto politicians in Scotland have comforted themselves with the thought that Nigel Farage could never make the political weather in a country that voted against Brexit and which seems less concerned about immigration. 'However, as in the rest of the UK, that is not a thought that is credible any more.' It is estimated around one in four Conservative voters in Scotland from last year's general election have switched to Reform, along with one in six Labour voters. Curtice said: 'Reform UK is damaging both of the principal unionist parties in Scotland. 'In this instance, it was not enough to save the SNP's bacon. But across Scotland there is still the likely prospect that the SNP will be the largest party in the next Holyrood election, but much diminished and much less powerful than the one currently occupying the debating chamber.'
