Portrait of the week: More defence spending, more migrant arrivals and more Jenrick stunts
Home
The government said that the armed forces had to move to 'warfighting readiness' and accepted the 62 recommendations of the Strategic Defence Review headed by the former defence secretary and head of Nato, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen. But the funding of the plans remained in doubt as the government insisted that a rise in defence spending to3 per cent by 2034 remained an 'aspiration'; yet Nato was expected at this month's summit to insist on a level of 3.5 per cent. The government committed £15 billion to its nuclear warhead programme; £1.5 billion to build six new munitions factories; an extra £1.5 billion for repairs to military housing; and the building of up to 12 conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines. Power stations and airports would be defended by Home Guard volunteers. The Treasury sold its final shares in the NatWest Group, bought in the financial crisis of 2008. The US private equity company KKR pulled out of a£4 billion rescue deal for Thames Water.
Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, declared that he regretted a 'clumsy' comparison of advocates of withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights to members of the Nazi party. Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, visited Scotland for the first time in six years. The electors of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse voted for a new Member of the Scottish parliament. On one day 1,195 migrants arrived in England in small boats. John Healey, the Defence Secretary, pointed to the French police policy of not intervening with migrants in the water: 'We saw the smugglers launching elsewhere and coming around like a taxi to pick them up.'
Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, released a video of himself challenging fare-dodgers on the London Underground to pay up.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
32 minutes ago
- Sky News
Starmer will be breathing a sigh of relief after clinching shock victory over SNP and Reform UK
Anything other than a win for Labour would have been a humiliation in this contest. It wasn't any old local by-election - this was a contest where Labour knew it could act as a mini barometer of Sir Keir Starmer's recent U-turn on winter fuel payments and become a test of how popular the politics of Nigel Farage are in Scotland. Labour are power hungry and have, for a long time, set their sights on forming the next Scottish government. The prime minister will this morning be breathing a sigh of relief after clinching this shock victory over the SNP and Reform UK. 1:01 This contest on the outskirts of Glasgow came at a time where Labour had been firefighting and grappling with polling suggesting they had blown their chances of ousting the SNP from power in Edinburgh after almost 20 years. The SNP had a spring in their step during this campaign after a chaotic couple of years. First Minister and SNP leader John Swinney had apparently stemmed the bleeding after the infamous police fraud investigation, endless fallout over gender identity reforms, and last year's general election where they were almost wiped out. This result leaves them no further forward than 12 months ago with questions over the party's strategy. Reform UK is very much in the Scottish picture now, finishing a few hundred votes behind the nationalists. This is a party led by a man who barely registered any support north of the border for many years. A remarkable transformation. The surge in support has spooked many because they know fine well Nigel Farage is only just getting started. One poll had Reform UK forming the next official opposition at Holyrood. After tonight, that might be a tall order but Mr Farage is shaking things up at the expense of the Conservatives. The unpredictable nature of this contest may give us a taste of what is to come.
Glasgow Times
33 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Sir Sadiq Khan urged to seek higher taxes and parking fees for SUVs
London Assembly Members agreed a motion calling on the mayor to take action because of fears that the increasing size of cars is damaging road surfaces, causing congestion and putting other road users at greater risk of death and serious injury. The London Assembly called on Sir Sadiq to ask the Treasury to amend vehicle excise duty to include a tax based on vehicle weight. It also wants the mayor to request that councils in the capital consider charging more for parking larger cars, and to call on the Department for Transport to introduce tighter limits on the size and bonnet height of passenger vehicles. The motion was agreed by 14 votes in favour and eight votes against. SUVs have grown in popularity in recent years, with many drivers favouring their higher seating position. They accounted for a third of all new car registrations in the UK last year, compared with just 12% a decade earlier. SUVs are generally taller, wider and heavier than traditional cars, and less fuel-efficient. The increase in the size of cars has been described as carspreading. Labour London Assembly Member Elly Baker, who proposed the motion, said the capital's streets 'weren't designed for larger vehicles like SUVs'. She went on: 'Their greater size, weight, and higher bonnets put vulnerable road users at greater risk, reduce available parking spaces, and cause more wear and tear on our roads. 'It's time we took sensible steps to manage the impact of oversized cars and ensure our streets remain safe and accessible for everyone.' But AA president Edmund King insisted it is 'up to Londoners to choose the type of vehicle that best fulfils their needs'. He added: 'It is not really the role of the London Assembly to dictate what cars individuals should drive. 'Some larger families may well need bigger vehicles with more passenger seats, whereas a driver conducting most trips alone may well choose a city car. 'London's streets were developed around the horse and cart, so of course our infrastructure needs modernising to keep up with change.' A recent study found pedestrians and cyclists are 44% more likely to die if they are hit by an SUV or similar-sized vehicle rather than a traditional car. The analysis produced by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Imperial College London stated that the figure rises to 82% for children.
Western Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Sir Sadiq Khan urged to seek higher taxes and parking fees for SUVs
London Assembly Members agreed a motion calling on the mayor to take action because of fears that the increasing size of cars is damaging road surfaces, causing congestion and putting other road users at greater risk of death and serious injury. The London Assembly called on Sir Sadiq to ask the Treasury to amend vehicle excise duty to include a tax based on vehicle weight. It's time we took sensible steps to manage the impact of oversized cars Elly Baker, London Assembly Member It also wants the mayor to request that councils in the capital consider charging more for parking larger cars, and to call on the Department for Transport to introduce tighter limits on the size and bonnet height of passenger vehicles. The motion was agreed by 14 votes in favour and eight votes against. SUVs have grown in popularity in recent years, with many drivers favouring their higher seating position. They accounted for a third of all new car registrations in the UK last year, compared with just 12% a decade earlier. SUVs are generally taller, wider and heavier than traditional cars, and less fuel-efficient. The increase in the size of cars has been described as carspreading. Labour London Assembly Member Elly Baker, who proposed the motion, said the capital's streets 'weren't designed for larger vehicles like SUVs'. She went on: 'Their greater size, weight, and higher bonnets put vulnerable road users at greater risk, reduce available parking spaces, and cause more wear and tear on our roads. 'It's time we took sensible steps to manage the impact of oversized cars and ensure our streets remain safe and accessible for everyone.' But AA president Edmund King insisted it is 'up to Londoners to choose the type of vehicle that best fulfils their needs'. He added: 'It is not really the role of the London Assembly to dictate what cars individuals should drive. 'Some larger families may well need bigger vehicles with more passenger seats, whereas a driver conducting most trips alone may well choose a city car. 'London's streets were developed around the horse and cart, so of course our infrastructure needs modernising to keep up with change.' A recent study found pedestrians and cyclists are 44% more likely to die if they are hit by an SUV or similar-sized vehicle rather than a traditional car. The analysis produced by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Imperial College London stated that the figure rises to 82% for children.
