Union militants kick out Angela Rayner as Birmingham bin war threaten to plunge Labour into another civil war
Members of the powerful hard left union voted to suspend her at its policy conference in Brighton today over her criticism of the walk out that led to bags of waste piling up in the streets.
The union also said it will 're-examine its relationship' with Labour over its refusal to side with workers - a clear threat to pull the millions it gives in funding every year.
However there is some debate over whether Ms Rayner is still in Unite and eligible to be suspended. She is understood to have resigned her membership several months ago, though she is still listed as an active member.
She urged refuse staff to accept a pay offer in April, saying their strike was 'causing misery and disruption' for residents.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said today that the union would 'call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette'.
'Angela Rayner has had every opportunity to intervene and resolve this dispute but has instead backed a rogue council that has peddled lies and smeared its workers fighting huge pay cuts,' she said.
'The disgraceful actions of the government and a so-called Labour council, is essentially fire and rehire and makes a joke of the Employment Relations Act promises.
'People up and down the country are asking whose side is the Labour government on and coming up with the answer not workers.'
It is not the first time Unite has threatened to pull its money when it has not got its way.
Bin workers walked out in March over planned pay changes by the cash-strapped city council.
Unite said the deal would have included 'substantial' pay cuts for workers and did not address potential pay cuts for 200 drivers.
People living in the city say their health suffered from the stench of piling waste while 'cat-sized' rats raided the mounting rubbish outside their homes.
Visiting the city in April with Local Government Minister, Jim McMahon, Ms Rayner said: 'The people of Birmingham are our first priority – this dispute is causing misery and disruption to residents and the backlog must be dealt with quickly to address public health risks.
'My department is working with Birmingham City Council to support its response to accelerate clearing the backlog and rapidly improve the situation on the ground. Neighbouring authorities are providing additional vehicles and crews, and we are providing logistical support.
'I have pressed both sides to negotiate at pace to urgently find a resolution. There is now a better offer on the table and I would urge Unite to suspend the action and accept the improved deal so we achieve fairness for both workers and residents of this city.'
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said today that the union would 'call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette'.
Earlier this year the Mail revealed this week that Union bosses behind strikes which have left the streets of Birmingham piled high with rotting waste are directing the action from outside of the city - in leafy suburbs with regular bin collections.
A Downing Street spokesman said the Government's priority throughout the dispute had 'always' been Birmingham's residents.
The strikes have resulted in unsanitary conditions throughout the city, with large piles of rubbish in the streets.
The No 10 spokesman also told reporters: 'As you know, Unite's industrial action caused disruption to waste collection.
'We have worked intensively with the council to tackle the backlog and clean up the streets for the residents for public health.
'We remain in close contact with the council and continue to monitor the situation as we support its recovery and transformation
'I think it's important to look back to the context of this dispute: Unite is in dispute against Birmingham City Council's decision to reform unfair staff structures, which were a major cause of unequal pay claims and left the council liable to hundreds of millions of pounds in claims, and that was a key factor cited in the council section 114 notice in 2023, declaring bankruptcy.'
Shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Ms Rayner 'faces a serious conflict of interest, having accepted thousands of pounds from the Unite union to fund her general election campaign'.
He added: 'Unions like Unite rarely offer financial support without expecting something in return — and we're already seeing the consequences in their aggressive demands to dismantle key trade union laws.
'It's time for all Labour ministers and the Labour-led council to take a firm stand against these militant unions. A good place to start would be suspending taxpayer-funded ''facility time'' for Unite while their members are on strike.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ministers must summon the courage to right an ‘obvious injustice'
The very judges who handed out 'unfair' indefinite prison sentences have joined The Independent 's campaign to resentence thousands of offenders who are still trapped by a law that was abolished in 2012. Sir John Saunders, a former High Court judge, tells us that he would apologise to offenders he sentenced to imprisonment for public protection (IPP) terms. 'I should say I'm really sorry this has happened; it's extremely unfair,' he said. 'I didn't want to be party to unfairness. I would feel very bad about it, I would apologise to them.' The sentences, described as an 'obvious injustice' by one former senior judge, were introduced by David Blunkett as home secretary in 2005 in an attempt to deal with a small number of offenders who might continue to be a danger to the public. Such prisoners were given no release date, were subject to stringent assessment before being let out, and were then liable indefinitely for recall to prison if they broke the conditions of their release. However, the sentences were used more often than Lord Blunkett intended, and the psychological effects of indefinite detention caused more problems than it solved. Lord Blunkett now describes the policy as his 'biggest regret'. The law was repealed by the coalition government in 2012, but it continued to apply to the thousands of prisoners still serving IPP sentences. Victims of the scandal, whose tragic cases have been taken up by The Independent, include Leroy Douglas, who has served 19 years for stealing a mobile phone; Thomas White, who set himself alight in his cell and has served 13 years for stealing a phone; and Abdullahi Suleman, who is still inside 19 years after he was jailed for a laptop robbery. The Independent supports a plan put forward by an expert panel convened by the Howard League for Penal Reform, which calls for IPP prisoners to be given a release date within a two-year window at their next parole hearing. They should, in effect, be resentenced and treated henceforth on the same basis as all other offenders. James Timpson, the prisons minister, says: 'We have significantly improved support for these offenders, with greater access to rehabilitation and mental health support. There is more work to do as we reduce the number of IPP offenders in custody, but we will only do so in a way that protects the public.' We understand why ministers in successive governments have been reluctant to go further. They are fearful of the consequences if someone released from an IPP sentence goes on to commit a serious offence. And they are right to make the protection of the public the highest priority. But that will not be achieved by the continued indefinite detention of 2,500 prisoners who were unlucky enough to be sentenced at the wrong time. Especially when a greater risk to the public is probably posed by the early release of prisoners to free up space in our overcrowded prisons. Simon Tonking, the former recorder of Stafford, told The Independent that the Labour government should use its majority to end the injustice by taking up the Howard League's proposals: 'Virtually everybody who has had any professional dealings with IPP knows that it is unjust and now is the time to act.' It is no use for former ministers such as Lord Blunkett and Alex Chalk, the former justice secretary, calling for justice to be done after they have left office. It is up to Lord Timpson, his boss Shabana Mahmood and ultimately Sir Keir Starmer to do the right thing while they can.
The Sun
25 minutes ago
- The Sun
Chelsea have spent eye-watering £360MILLION on defenders in three years – but how many of them were worth it?
THE arrival of £37million Jorrel Hato takes Chelsea's spending on defenders under their new owners past a record-shattering £360m. Yet the Blues back four which lines up against Crystal Palace on the opening weekend of the new season may well include just one player who cost a fee. Marc Cucurella, who came in from Brighton three years ago in a deal worth up to £62m, is the biggest success of Chelsea 's hit-and-miss defensive recruitment. The signing of Hato is a major coup for the Blues, with Liverpool and Arsenal among the other major clubs who wanted the talented and versatile teenager. The young Dutchman is the 12th defender brought in since the consortium led by Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly took over the club in May 2022. But Cucurella, a Euro 2024 winner with Spain, is the only member of the current Chelsea back four that you would describe as world class. And if Chelsea are to win domestic and European titles, they will need more defenders to reach that level. To be fair, Enzo Maresca 's side can already claim to be world champions. To beat a flair-filled Paris Saint-Germain side 3-0, just weeks after they had spanked Inter Milan 5-0 in the Champions League final, was an impressive achievement. The back four which started the Club World Cup final was left back Cucurella, homegrown centre backs Levi Colwill and Trevoh Chalobah, and right back Malo Gusto. The Frenchman, now 22, could end up costing Chelsea £30.7m after signing from Lyon in January 2023 and spending the rest of that season on loan back at the French club. Gusto has done a decent, sometimes very good, job at right back. He covered for the long injury-related absences of Reece James over the last two seasons and kept his place when James was employed in midfield - as he was against PSG. 8 8 But if you believe Moises Caicedo and Enzo Fernandez will start the biggest games in front of the defence, and James will mostly play as an inverted right back when he is fit, then Gusto will not be in Enzo Maresca's strongest 11. Chalobah did well after returning from half a season on loan at Crystal Palace, but could yet find himself being sold this summer. As a product of the Chelsea Academy, he would generate pure profit for financial rules purposes and there could be clubs willing to pay £40m for him. If Chalobah left, his replacement as right-sided centre back at the start of the season would almost certainly be Tosin Adarabioyo. The free transfer from Fulham last summer has carved a niche for himself off the pitch as well as on it. At just 27 he is one of the senior members of the squad, and plays an 'Uncle Tosin' role to the youngsters, enjoying a particularly close relationship with fellow Mancunian Cole Palmer. But no-one, not even Tosin himself, would claim that he is one of Europe's best defenders. If Wesley Fofana is able to put his injury hell behind him and rediscover his previous form, he could yet meet those standards and become a Chelsea stalwart for years to come. Fofana, still just 24, has made only 34 appearances for the Blues since arriving from Leicester in the summer of 2022 in a deal worth up to £75m. He is the most expensive of all Chelsea's defensive signings and that means, through no fault of his own, he has also been the biggest let down. But only just. The Blues really have had trouble finding a settled and satisfactory centre back pairing. Within weeks of the 2022 takeover, Kalidou Koulibaly became the new regime's first defensive signing. The Napoli star's £35m fee felt a little steep for a player about to turn 31, but the Senegal international was highly-rated and on the radar of other big clubs. Koulibaly failed to live up to his billing, although he could point to the chaos of playing under three different managers and a hamstring injury as decent explanations. He was offloaded after just one season to Saudi Pro League side Al-Hilal - and played for them in this year's Club World Cup. When Chelsea set a new record for winter window spending in early 2023, Benoit Badiashile 's £35m arrival from Monaco went a little under the radar in the wake of massive deals for Enzo Fernandez and Mykhailo Mudryk. The Frenchman did fine in a struggling team in the remainder of the 22/23 season, but not well enough to seal his spot. And when injury kept Badiashile out of the start of the following campaign, Colwill took his chance after returning from loan at Brighton. 8 8 8 Meanwhile the unfortunate Fofana had suffered the second major knee injury of his short Chelsea career in the summer of 2023. Within weeks, the Blues had gone back to Monaco to bring in Axel Disasi for another £38m. The France international was a first choice under Mauricio Pochettino for much of the 2023/4 season. But new boss Maresca did not fancy Disasi, and he was sent on loan to Aston Villa for the second half of last season. The signing of Hato, 19, fits Chelsea's current transfer philosophy of signing the best young players and trying to turn them into superstars. If they fail, they can usually be sold on for a profit, as is likely to be the case with Renato Veiga. The versatile Portuguese was signed only last summer, did well enough to earn a loan to Juventus for the second half of the season and could find himself joining Atletico Madrid for a chunky fee. In addition to Veiga, Chelsea signed two teenage defenders last summer in centre back Aaron Anselmino and left back Caleb Wiley. The latter has now returned to Watford for a second season on loan, while Anselmino may well also leave on a temporary deal after recovering from injury. Mamadou Sarr, 19, is likely to be loaned back to Strasbourg after the Blues paid £12m to their sister club. Hato is also 19 but at a fee of £37m, he will surely need to deliver for Chelsea this season. The Blues will probably ease him in, perhaps initially as cover for left back Cucurella. In the longer term, Hato should end up challenging Colwill for that left-sided centre back slot or forming a partnership with the England international. And finally, after spending more on defenders than any club, Chelsea could end up with a world-class back four to show for it. 8
The Guardian
25 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on car finance scandal redress: mis-sold loans demand action, not excuses or spin
With its ruling in the car finance case, the UK supreme court sent a clear message: some motorists purchased vehicles with deals that were indeed unfair, but it's not the judiciary's job to redraw the boundaries of consumer protection law. That burden, the justices suggested, rests with regulators and elected governments. This reasoning is in line with a major speech in June by the court's president, Lord Reed, who argued that judges aren't policymakers – and shouldn't be. He led a bench that nonetheless upheld a finding of unfairness in the case of the factory supervisor Marcus Johnson. The court flagged the danger, defined the threshold – but stopped short of imposing redress itself. Now, the baton has been passed. Millions could get payouts if the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) follows the court ruling with its proposed redress scheme, now out for consultation. The regulator admits what courts and campaigners have long suggested: that hidden commissions and opaque contracts were endemic, and that consumers were misled on a large scale. It may be 2025, but the roots of this scandal stretch back decades. More than 90% of new car purchases are financed, and for years, buyers weren't offered the best deal – just the one that earned the broker the biggest cut. Last October, the court of appeal saw hidden commissions as tantamount to bribes – secret incentives to push pricier loans. Banks had been on the hook for potentially £40bn in compensation had that view prevailed. But the supreme court disagreed. Dealers aren't fiduciaries, it said. They're not priests or doctors. They're salespeople and everyone knows it. The Treasury had tried, and failed, to intervene on behalf of banks that feared big payouts. The supreme court dismissed that petition with waspish brevity. Rachel Reeves may argue she was guarding financial stability, but it is not a good look to be siding with lenders over misled consumers, especially when there is a strong case to suggest regulators had been asleep at the wheel. The FCA now admits that many firms broke the rules. It plans a compensation scheme covering loans dating back to 2007, including both discretionary and some non-discretionary commission arrangements. The potential bill? At least £9bn, and possibly double that. Most individuals will probably receive less than £950 in compensation. The court's refusal to stretch the law to encompass issues of trust wasn't a shrug; it was a signal. The law allows unfairness to be addressed. But the heavy lifting must be done by the state. This episode lays bare a deeper malaise. Britain's credit system often runs on skewed incentives and asymmetric information. Brokers pose as advisers but act as commission-driven salespeople. In Mr Johnson's case a £1,650 hidden commission – a quarter of the car's price – went undisclosed. That's not a quirk; it's economics' classic lemons problem. In car finance, consumers didn't know how much brokers were pocketing or how that skewed the deal. Without trust or clarity, quality suffers – and everyone overpays for 'lemons' (duds). The court of appeal did focus minds; and failing to interpret the law robustly in the face of clear wrongdoing is itself a judicial choice. The supreme court smartly redirected the narrative. The regulator is stirring. Ministers must now support a consumer-facing system of redress and not shield the City from the consequences of its own mis‑selling. The public will be watching.
