Latest news with #JacobRees-Mogg
Daily Mirror
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
BRIAN READE: Brexit was an act of self-sabotage and howls of betrayal are a joke
The best part of the UK's new deal with the EU is how dated and decrepit it made Brexit feel. The howls of betrayal from the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and Mark Francois at Labour's attempt to rebuild bridges with our European allies sounded like the last croaks from a pair of dying toads. The attempts at cutting insults from Boris Johnson and Daniel Hannan landed like rehashed gags from a clapped-out, 1950s, end-of-the-pier act. The front-pages of right-wing papers screaming 'Starmer's Surrender' 'Done Up Like A Kipper' and 'Kiss Goodbye To Brexit' felt like yellowing relics unearthed in a time capsule. In fact, the whole bitter reaction to a deal with our biggest trading partner that has won overwhelming approval from small and big businesses, was an embarrassing reminder of a futile civil war that everyone but ideological fanatics realises was a deluded act of self-sabotage. A YouGov survey this week found that 66% of voters now favoured closer ties with the EU, 62%, thought Brexit had been a failure, and only 13% viewed it as a success. That's about one in eight of us. Which, coincidentally, is roughly as many of us who have any faith left in the party that inflicted this costly mistake on us. A day after Kemi Badenoch called the EU reset a 'surrender deal' YouGov found the Tories in fourth place nationally, with 16% of Brits saying they would vote for them. Which is the lowest Tory score ever recorded by the pollster. This notion of Remainer surrender, of Labour metropolitan elitists undemocratically reversing a referendum, is a delusion clung on to by a shrinking group of backward-looking navel-gazers. As polls show, the majority of British people realised long ago that right-wing con-artists, most of them obsessed with the myth of British supremacy, others like Boris Johnson consumed solely with their own ambition, sold them a pack of lies. They know the phrase Brexit Betrayal is an oxymoron. A contradiction of terms. Because you can't betray something that has turned out to be an act of betrayal from the Tory politicians who ushered it in without a clue about how it would work. An act which has failed so abysmally that the independent Office for Budget Responsibility estimates it has brought about a 4% reduction in the size of the UK economy, equivalent to £100billion a year. There's the gaping economic black hole that Rachel Reeves is charged with fixing today. The truth is that back in 2016, Brexiteers narrowly won the vote but in the years since they have majorly lost the argument. And if the referendum was re-run today it would be a very different result. With US economic isolationism, Russian aggression and Chinese technological domination being the new world order, Britain being on its own is no longer an option. Which is why it's blindingly obvious to most sane minds that our national interest lies in closer defence and trading ties with Europe. As for Brexit, few outside of the political and media class that orchestrated it or the vein-busters on Question Time, care about it. And the easier it becomes for young people to work in Europe, families to travel there and businesses to trade there, the more the howling Rees-Moggs and Johnsons will be deemed irrelevant. It couldn't happen to a nicer shower of fossils. The teeth whitening brand has knocked up to 40% off some of its best selling products and bundles until May 27.
Spectator
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
Poll: three in four voters say Labour's priorities are wrong
They say that politics is all about priorities. But what happens when the public says you've got it wrong? Mr S has got his hands on some polling – and it doesn't make for happy reading for No. 10. Some 76 per cent of UK adults say the government has the wrong priorities, with low support for policies like football regulation and the smoking ban. It seems like the public have taken a leaf out of Jacob Rees-Mogg's book: 'Boo to nanny…' When asked which areas the government is spending too much or too little time on, the proposed football regulator and the generational smoking ban policies ranked lowest. Just 22 per cent said the government isn't spending enough time on vaping, and only 14 per cent felt the same about football regulation. Still, there is some good news for Labour: the public overwhelmingly back the PM's war on visas. When asked to rank key policy areas addressed by this parliament, 'establishing a Border Security Command with counter-terror-style powers to target illegal immigration gangs' was selected as the number one priority, chosen by twice as many respondents as any other option.
Daily Mirror
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Ofcom proposes huge change to rules on politician presenters after GB News drama
Ofcom has proposed changes to the Broadcasting Code after a High Court judge quashed two of its decisions against GB News around politician presenters earlier this year Ofcom has announced that it's proposing a change to the Broadcasting Code's rules on politicians becoming presenters after being told by a High Court judge to reconsider its ruling against GB News earlier this year. Back in February, a judge quashed two of Ofcom's decisions against GB News after the regulator found that five of its programmes - including one hosted by Jacob Rees-Mogg - had broken impartiality and content regulations rules. Now, Ofcom has revealed that it is consulting a chance to a rule within the broadcasting code and its guidance following the High Court's judgement. "The proposed change aims to make it clear to broadcasters that a politician cannot be used as a newsreader, news interviewer or news reporter in any type of programme, unless there is exceptional editorial justification," Ofcom said yesterday. "Politicians would still be able to present programmes under this rule change. But they would not be able to present news – regardless of the nature of the programme, without exceptional editorial justification." They added that the proposed change comes after the High Court's judgement provided clarity that in law "a programme cannot be considered both a news programme and a current affairs programme at the same time". The regulatory body also said that it hopes for the rule to "better reflect the evolving media environment" with the rise of politicians becoming presenters on TV. "The distinction between news and current affairs content has become more blurred and the use of politicians to present programmes has become more common," they continued. In the High Court judgement, Mrs Justice Collins Rice ruled that Ofcom's decisions against GB News were 'vitiated by error of law' and that they 'conflated a news programme and a current affairs programme'. She added: "It remains open to Ofcom, in law, to pursue investigations into either or both broadcasts as a potential breach." Back in October, Ofcom imposed a fine of £10,000 on GB News for "breaking due impartiality rules" during an interview with former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. As a result of the High Court judgement, Ofcom were ordered to pay for any legal costs incurred by GB News. GB News CEO Angelos Frangopoulos said in a statement at the time: 'This landmark decision by the High Court vindicates GB News' position as the fearless defender of Free Speech in the United Kingdom. 'Our court victory is hugely significant for the entire British broadcasting industry. We are proud that we were the only media company prepared to have the courage of our convictions. 'Ofcom has been found to have acted unlawfully so much so that it even breached Human Rights law. I call on the Government and Parliament to consider the seriousness of this fundamental failure by Ofcom.'
Yahoo
04-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sorry civil servants, your WFH dream is over: the public purse demands accountability
It was my greatest achievement of the week. It demanded perseverance, patience and intellect. But I got there. I got through to a chap at the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, my ambition being to seek clarity on eligibility for delinked payments (don't ask). To reach this civil servant, I first manoeuvred deftly through acres of text on the Government's website, before finding a number. I called it and was slightly scared by the, albeit recorded, gruff Northerner who directs calls. And then I waited. And waited. Before my call was finally answered by someone who was very helpful, except that I was struck by the meowing. I mentioned the cat and the man told me: 'Yes, he's asking me to open the kitchen window for him.' It was very charming and all necessary information was usefully conveyed, except, after I ended the call, I wondered how different the world is today. Once upon a time, our civil servants, neatly tucked into their pinstripe suits, grabbed their hat and brolly and made their commute to their office. And there they toiled between Monday and Friday, a nine to five, 48-hour week. Nowadays, the average number of hours worked is 37 and you'll likely find that civil servant, not at a desk in some traditional office garb, but at home, iPad on the kitchen table, dressed in jeans and T-shirt and with a cat on their lap. Which could account for why it takes so long for phones to be answered or emails to be read. All of which is irksome enough for the tax-paying public and was why so many of us cheered when Jacob Rees-Mogg, in April 2022, as minister for Brexit opportunities and government efficiency, left printed notes on the empty desks of civil servants saying, 'So sorry you were out when visited. I look forward to seeing you in the office very soon'. Since Covid, many civil servants now practice what is called 'hybrid working' with, a recent survey showed, 35 per cent saying that when they worked from home, it was in a non-work specific space, so that's the kitchen or in bed. But what is worse is that, as we learnt this week, some of those hybrid workers are not just juggling policy documents and cats, they're nipping off for a few hour's paid work elsewhere, specifically in one case reported as an Uber driver. Flexible working has meant that a considerable number of civil servants are taking on second jobs. And it's becoming increasingly common with public sector workers employed by councils. Wakefield, Enfield and Kensington and Chelsea councils have all reported catching staff who had multiple jobs. And now investigators from the National Fraud Initiative are scouring online forums in which civil servants swap tips about how to best manage a covert second job. There was the thorny issue of diary clashes, for example, when a meeting for the main role was mooted for a time when an individual had a call booked relating to their second job. 'Pretend to have food poisoning,' came the advice. On the online forum Reddit, one person wrote: 'Do all you can to not get caught,' adding that it was important not to draw attention to yourself. 'Do not over-deliver or under-perform. Just be middle of the pack.' We should, of course, be cheered that the National Fraud Initiative is investigating because this duplicitous behaviour is exactly that – fraud. As the Taxpayers' Alliance said this week, 'Some public sector staff are taking taxpayers for a ride. Councils and Whitehall departments must get a grip, root out this kind of abuse, and ensure every penny is spent on delivering services, not funding secret second jobs.' The problem is, how on earth do you bust someone doing a second job? Do agents from the government fraud squad raid suburban houses on a sunny Friday afternoon to see if J Frobisher is moonlighting as a kids' party magician or, worse, working for two councils at the same time? Of course not. The reality is that when people work from home, there is what Gemma Young, Enfield council's former head of internal audit, calls 'reduced oversight'. Or rather, 'having absolutely no clue what Belinda Smith is up to when she's at home'. The change in working patterns post-Covid is a revolution. Which is fine if you work in the private sector and your boss is happy. But if you're in a secure job on the public payroll, it should be different. And there is only one way of ensuring civil servants aren't dallying with a side-hustle and that's to insist they do what, until relatively recently, was regarded as entirely fair and normal. Which is to go to work to an office, nine to five, Monday to Friday. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
04-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Sorry civil servants, your WFH dream is over: the public purse demands accountability
It was my greatest achievement of the week. It demanded perseverance, patience and intellect. But I got there. I got through to a chap at the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, my ambition being to seek clarity on eligibility for delinked payments (don't ask). To reach this civil servant, I first manoeuvred deftly through acres of text on the Government's website, before finding a number. I called it and was slightly scared by the, albeit recorded, gruff Northerner who directs calls. And then I waited. And waited. Before my call was finally answered by someone who was very helpful, except that I was struck by the meowing. I mentioned the cat and the man told me: 'Yes, he's asking me to open the kitchen window for him.' It was very charming and all necessary information was usefully conveyed, except, after I ended the call, I wondered how different the world is today. Once upon a time, our civil servants, neatly tucked into their pinstripe suits, grabbed their hat and brolly and made their commute to their office. And there they toiled between Monday and Friday, a nine to five, 48-hour week. Nowadays, the average number of hours worked is 37 and you'll likely find that civil servant, not at a desk in some traditional office garb, but at home, iPad on the kitchen table, dressed in jeans and T-shirt and with a cat on their lap. Which could account for why it takes so long for phones to be answered or emails to be read. All of which is irksome enough for the tax-paying public and was why so many of us cheered when Jacob Rees-Mogg, in April 2022, as minister for Brexit opportunities and government efficiency, left printed notes on the empty desks of civil servants saying, 'So sorry you were out when visited. I look forward to seeing you in the office very soon'. Since Covid, many civil servants now practice what is called 'hybrid working' with, a recent survey showed, 35 per cent saying that when they worked from home, it was in a non-work specific space, so that's the kitchen or in bed. But what is worse is that, as we learnt this week, some of those hybrid workers are not just juggling policy documents and cats, they're nipping off for a few hour's paid work elsewhere, specifically in one case reported as an Uber driver. Flexible working has meant that a considerable number of civil servants are taking on second jobs. And it's becoming increasingly common with public sector workers employed by councils. Wakefield, Enfield and Kensington and Chelsea councils have all reported catching staff who had multiple jobs. And now investigators from the National Fraud Initiative are scouring online forums in which civil servants swap tips about how to best manage a covert second job. There was the thorny issue of diary clashes, for example, when a meeting for the main role was mooted for a time when an individual had a call booked relating to their second job. 'Pretend to have food poisoning,' came the advice. On the online forum Reddit, one person wrote: 'Do all you can to not get caught,' adding that it was important not to draw attention to yourself. 'Do not over-deliver or under-perform. Just be middle of the pack.' We should, of course, be cheered that the National Fraud Initiative is investigating because this duplicitous behaviour is exactly that – fraud. As the Taxpayers' Alliance said this week, 'Some public sector staff are taking taxpayers for a ride. Councils and Whitehall departments must get a grip, root out this kind of abuse, and ensure every penny is spent on delivering services, not funding secret second jobs.' The problem is, how on earth do you bust someone doing a second job? Do agents from the government fraud squad raid suburban houses on a sunny Friday afternoon to see if J Frobisher is moonlighting as a kids' party magician or, worse, working for two councils at the same time? Of course not. The reality is that when people work from home, there is what Gemma Young, Enfield council's former head of internal audit, calls 'reduced oversight'. Or rather, 'having absolutely no clue what Belinda Smith is up to when she's at home'. The change in working patterns post-Covid is a revolution. Which is fine if you work in the private sector and your boss is happy. But if you're in a secure job on the public payroll, it should be different. And there is only one way of ensuring civil servants aren't dallying with a side-hustle and that's to insist they do what, until relatively recently, was regarded as entirely fair and normal. Which is to go to work to an office, nine to five, Monday to Friday.
