Latest news with #JacobReesMogg
Telegraph
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
‘Kill joy Lefties' in Bath Rugby stadium row over oak tree
'Fanatical' Green councillors are embroiled in a row with Bath Rugby Club over its plans to build a new stadium. Two years ago, Bath Rugby club announced plans for a new 18,000-seater Rugby stadium at the Recreation Ground in Bath city centre. But Joanna Wright and Saskia Heijltjes have accused the Premiership club of endangering a '200 year plus copper beech tree', which sits just metres away from the proposed structure. 'They are literally building this stadium within three metres of the tree,' Ms Wright, a Green Party councillor for Lambridge Ward, told The Telegraph. 'It's a 200 year plus copper beech tree which is a heritage veteran tree. These trees are important in our landscape, one of the reasons Bath is part of the UNESCO heritage site is because of its green setting.' She objected to the plans because she believed putting in foundations of the stadium would involve digging on the root system of the tree, which could then damage the tree in the process. Sir Jacob Rees Mogg, who lives a 30-minute drive from the proposed stadium, supported the rugby club and told the Telegraph that it was a case of 'fanatical greens' and 'typical kill joy Lefties'. He said: 'As the Club is promising to protect the tree, it sounds as if the fanatical greens are trying to stop the development. Typical kill joy lefties.' Bath Rugby club has disputed Ms Wright's claims and said the design proposals would protect the tree. The club also said that it has to spend around £1 million every year assembling and disassembling temporary stands. Tarquin McDonald, the chief executive, told the BBC: 'If we were not able to redevelop [the stadium], it calls into question our ability to stay here long term. That would be tragic for the city and the club.' Ms Wright hit back at Sir Jacob's comments, describing his statement as 'utter tosh'. She said: 'Just because you want to protect nature doesn't make you a crazy fanatic. 'I have nothing against rugby, but I also want to protect trees. Veteran trees should be supported in our urban landscape. They are as important culturally as rugby is - it's about coming to a compromise to deliver that... They are essentially going to build within the zone of the root system of the tree. 'It has a 21 metre root protection area, which would be dramatically reduced to 3 metres under the current plans. 'They are building the edge of the stadium within metres of this tree. Therefore they are putting in groundworks. If you think about foundations of any building, they are going to have to dig a long way down for that. 'I can't see how it's possible to preserve the tree and build the foundations.' Residents of Bath have also been objecting to the proposals on the planning application which was submitted. One objector, Susan Macdonald said: 'The bulk of the application is not about playing rugby. This is about building a hospitality complex. 'We the residents will have endure this even more massive stadium design, destroying the listed buildings landscape and seriously risking our UNESCO world heritage status'.
Daily Mail
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
GUY ADAMS: It's an affront to justice - how innocent people are spending decades extra in prison because the body tasked with re-examining their cases is run by... Britain's grotesquely USELESS quango boss on £130,000 a year
The Criminal Cases Review Commission operates from a ten-storey office block overlooking the gleaming, space-age facade of New Street station in central Birmingham. It was opened in July 2022 by then government 'efficiency' minister Jacob Rees-Mogg under what he called 'plans to create a leaner and more efficient public estate' by relocating civil servants from London to the regions. The Commission, whose 113 employees carry out the critical role of identifying potential miscarriages in our justice system, is one of 20 quangos and government departments that moved into the ultra-modern facility that year. Ever since, staff have been able to enjoy what its website calls 'comfortable breakout areas, a well-stocked communal kitchen, and great access to transport links and city life'. That's the theory, at least. But the reality is quite different. For on an average day, those swanky 'breakout areas' and kitchens are weirdly empty. To blame is one highly controversial fact: Five years after Covid, the organisation, which is better known as the CCRC, continues to let employees work entirely from home. Most staff show up to HQ just 'once or twice a year, on average,' it admits, saying the only ones required to venture into the building on a regular basis are members of the IT department, plus a presumably under-employed receptionist. Even chief executive Karen Kneller, a lawyer who received a £130,000 salary from taxpayers last year, plus £34,000 towards her pension, rarely bothers to cross her expensive building's threshold. 'I am probably in the office maybe one or two days every couple of months or so,' she blithely admitted to a (gobsmacked) committee of MPs last month. This despite Kneller living with her husband Mark Etchells in a semi-detached house in Handsworth – a mere 15-minute drive from the office she so rarely visits. If the CCRC's role was of limited importance, or if Mrs Kneller, 61, and her staff were doing a semi-competent job, such loose working practices might be vaguely defensible. But in fact, the opposite is true. On the first count, the organisation is of course very important indeed. It plays a crucial role in upholding faith in Britain's criminal justice system by reviewing contested cases in search of wrongful convictions. Among the various (seriously) hot potatoes it is currently juggling is the thorny question of whether to return Lucy Letby's case to the Court of Appeal. On the second count, regarding competence, Kneller stands on even stickier ground. For those MPs she spoke to last month, who sit on Parliament's Justice Committee, published an explosive report yesterday saying the organisation not only requires 'root and branch reform,' but that its chief executive's position is no longer 'tenable'. The MPs were, if anything, understating things. For this powerful quango, which chews through almost £10 million of public money a year, has in recent years become a byword for chaos and dysfunction. A glance under the bonnet reveals that its 50-odd Peloton-riding case workers are permitted not just to work remotely, but also to choose when they will actually be 'on duty', thanks to an absurdly liberal 'flexi-time' policy. This inevitably and frequently places them at the coal-face at different times of the day from colleagues and team net result, critics say, is that it can take years to deal with even straightforward cases, leaving wrongly convicted victims to twiddle their thumbs in jail. Meanwhile, a series of high-profile blunders have lately seen Kneller's Commission blamed for contributing to some of the most grotesque miscarriages of justice in modern British history. Only last week, we saw a case in point when Peter Sullivan, the so-called 'Beast of Birkenhead', walked free after spending an astonishing 38 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. A vulnerable man, who suffers from learning disabilities, Mr Sullivan had been wrongly convicted of the brutal sexual assault and murder of a 21-year-old barmaid in 1986. He'd always protested his innocence, and his legal team had told the CCRC in 2008 that DNA analysis of a semen sample found on the victim would exonerate him. But while a forensic technique called 'Y-STR', which allows such analysis, became available in 2013, the Commission waited until 2021 to order proper tests. Even then, it would be another four years before he was acquitted. Lord Falconer, the former Justice Secretary, described the Commission as 'unled and generally regarded as useless' in the wake of Mr Sullivan's acquittal. Lord Garnier, a former Tory Solicitor General, told an interviewer that the organisation was in 'a state of complete collapse' and needs 'gripping' by the Government. Friends of Victor Nealon, who was wrongfully convicted of attempted rape and spent an additional ten years in prison because the CCRC again refused to carry out basic DNA tests that would have proved his innocence, would presumably agree. As would Andrew Malkinson, who served 17 years for a rape he didn't commit before his conviction was finally quashed in 2023. He and his legal team had spent more than a decade pleading with the CCRC to conduct DNA tests on samples taken from the victim, which he steadfastly maintained would prove his innocence only to meet with obfuscation and refusal. Had staff done their job properly, Mr Malkinson would have been released at least a decade earlier. A formal inquiry into the Commission's calamitous handling of the Malkinson case, by a KC named Chris Henley, was published last year. It exposed a catalogue of appalling blunders, missed opportunities and shabby work by the quango, whose caseworkers exhibited 'muddled' thinking, 'poor' analysis and language that was 'casual and dismissive'. Their work 'lacked purpose' and was 'left drifting for many months' by superiors who didn't bother to read evidence, Mr Henley found. Importantly, the CCRC's 'head of casework' at the time of both its 'very poor' work on Mr Malkinson, and Peter Sullivan's first approach to the organisation, was its current chief executive, Karen Kneller. A public sector 'lifer,' qualified barrister, and enthusiastic quangocrat, she has spent three decades on the government payroll, including about 20 years at the CCRC and juggles her current role with a host of side jobs. They range from a non-executive directorship of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, a trusteeship of homeless charity Shelter, and a role chairing an equalities charity calling itself a 'think fair tank' named Brap. All this, and more, contributed to a car-crash appearance by Kneller before the Justice Committee in Parliament last month, at which her at times woeful efforts to defend the organisation's culture met with disbelief from MPs. Things got off to a bad start when the chief executive was asked whether she'd yet bothered to apologise to Mr Malkinson for the ten extra years he spent behind bars thanks to the CCRC's obvious incompetence. 'No, I haven't,' she glibly responded. 'Do you think it might be appropriate to pass on that apology now?' asked an MP. 'Yes, absolutely,' she conceded. There followed a surreal exchange in which Kneller umm-ed and ah-ed that the CCRC is 'not an office-based organisation any more', and attempted to argue that this was absolutely fine because it allowed it to recruit talented staff from all over the country. Andy Slaughter, the Labour MP who chairs the Justice Committee, gave that line short shrift, claiming there was a 'hole in the heart of the organisation' and concluding: 'I cannot believe you are the only organisation in the country that has not come out of Covid yet.' Elsewhere in the extraordinary meeting, Kneller attempted to defend her generous remuneration (she was handed a 7 per cent pay rise and a bonus of £8,000-£10,000 just a month before Mr Malkinson was exonerated, and in the 2023-24 financial year enjoyed another 9 per cent rise) by saying she was 'not privy' to discussions about her salary. Perhaps most importantly of all, she was then asked to defend the organisation's response to Mr Henley's excoriating report. The KC's document turns out to have been submitted in January last year. But it wasn't published for six months, during which the CCRC, which already has a large taxpayer-funded press office, paid an external PR consultant £14,000 to advise them on how to manage the inevitable fallout. Several reports have suggested that the CCRC spent that period attempting to water down some of the report's findings, lobbying Mr Henley to 'soften' his criticism of senior employees. Asked whether such skulduggery had occurred, Kneller issued a vigorous denial, insisting to MPs that much of the delay was instead entirely due to 'typographical errors and some factual issues' with the report's findings. However, Mr Henley appears to remember things differently, and this week publicly insisted that Kneller's claim is completely false. He told the Sunday Times: 'Karen Kneller misled Parliament. Her answers to the select committee were thoroughly inaccurate.' The Justice Committee agrees, with that assessment describing her evidence to them as so 'unpersuasive' that 'we no longer feel it is tenable for her to continue as chief executive'. 'I don't see how she has any credibility or authority to stay in the role,' says Neil Shastri-Hurst, a Conservative member of the body. 'This is such an important job that to not have a grip on it, which is what we have found, is unforgivable.' Interestingly, the CCRC did not respond when I asked if they were standing by the Chief Executive, saying only that they intended to 'note' the Committee's recommendations. Among their pressing tasks will be to finally elect a CCRC chair – preferably one who is prepared to work full time. The previous incumbent, quangocrat Helen Pitcher, was forced to resign in January after Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was 'unfit' to do the job, after being singled out for criticism by Mr Henley. Pitcher was being paid £95,000-a-year to work two days a week, juggling the role with eight other jobs, including a non-executive directorship of United Biscuits and a seat on the Judicial Appointments Commission, where she earned another £55,000-£60,000 for working two days a week. She continues to do that role (which critics saw as being in conflict with her duties at the CCRC) to this day. Unlike most CCRC colleagues, who are banned from working on cases when overseas, Pitcher also spent vast amounts of time in Montenegro, where she ran a villa rental company named 'Perast Paradise Properties'. In fact, when the CCRC was thrown into crisis, following Mr Malkinson's acquittal in 2023, its part-time chair could be found on Instagram posing in bare feet on a boat outside a local mussel bar, boasting to her social media followers that she was 'having an amazing time'. Elsewhere, Pitcher has also been president of the 'directors network board' at Insead, the elite business school outside Paris. At the time she held the position, her then colleague Kneller spent tens of thousands of pounds of the CCRC's cash attending various courses at the institution, frequently staying at its in-house four-star hotel The Ermitage, which boasts a terrace bar overlooking the Fontainebleau forest, a fitness centre, treehouse bar and squash courts. Quite why such a keen advocate of 'remote' working felt the need to attend such a grand venue in person is anyone's guess, but the revelation, first reported by The Guardian newspaper in February, added to the sense of chaos around Kneller's tenure. All of which represents a shameful and shabby state of affairs for an organisation founded with the best of intentions in the 1990s, in the wake of several high-profile miscarriages of justice, including the cases of the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six. In its early days, the CCRC's 60 members of staff included a range of people experienced in exposing miscarriages of justice, including retired senior policemen. Among the 12 commissioners (of which three are needed to sign off a referral to the Court of Appeal) was David Jessel, presenter of the TV series Trial And Error, which helped overturn several convictions. He was joined by the forensic psychiatrist James MacKeith, who greatly contributed to the eventual quashing of the convictions of the Guildford Four in 1989 by proving evidence had been falsified and suppressed by police. Each was employed on a full-time basis, and expected to attend head office every day, where the work was carried out in a collegiate fashion. In return, commissioners were paid (for the time) a hefty salary of close to £90,000. Today, they are by contrast paid a daily fee of a few hundred pounds and largely work part-time. It's perhaps little surprise that three of the 12 roles are currently vacant. For most of the 2000s, the CCRC largely escaped public criticism. But in legal circles, there was growing hostility about both the length of time staff were taking to consider cases, and their apparent reluctance to send cases to the Court of Appeal, with only roughly 3 per cent being referred. In 2015, the Justice Committee said the organisation ought to be 'less cautious' in taking such steps, but the following year its referral rate fell to a mere 1 per cent. By then, Karen Kneller had been chief executive for three years. Questions were beginning to circulate about the calibre of staff the organisation was attracting, along with their work ethic. In 2018 a BBC Panorama investigation entitled Last Chance For Justice shared internal documents stating that case review managers were 'struggling to cope'. The programme found minutes from a meeting in which a commissioner said they 'doubted whether the work required to uncover certain miscarriages of justice was now being done'. The commissioner 'worried about a culture where staff believed finding new evidence was actually seen as troublesome because of the work involved'. Back then, the Commission (which covers England and Wales, but not Scotland) boasted 90 staff and a £5 million annual budget. Today, the size of its workforce has increased by a quarter, while its spending has doubled. But lawyers dealing with the organisation believe standards have continued to fall, particularly in recent years. Many blame the advent of so-called 'home working'. 'To do their job properly, CCRC staff need to be discussing things all the time and rubbing shoulders and bashing things around,' says Matt Foot, of the charity Appeal, which represented Mr Malkinson. 'But they are never in. I find the whole thing quite bizarre.' Glyn Maddocks, a KC who has successfully represented many victims of miscarriages of justice, tells me: 'It's outrageous. You can't do that sort of job remotely. It's an absolute nonsense. 'People need to be in the office, sitting in the meeting room with colleagues who have experience, discussing what to do next. The whole thing is a farce.' Mr Maddocks recently represented a man named Oliver Campbell, who in 2024 overturned a historic murder conviction. His victory followed a 24-year campaign which had initially seen the CCRC give his application short shrift. 'Given that experience, and what we now know about the shoddy job they did on Malkinson, you wonder how many other cases they've been incompetent with over the past 28 years,' adds Mr Maddocks. MPs agree. But the CCRC's annual report offers an insight into the culture of unaccountability that prevails among its deeply unimpressive top brass. Larded with management speak, wokery and irrelevancies (in the opening pages, it declares that 37 members of staff are male, 76 female, 19.5 per cent hail from an ethnic minority, and 20.8 per cent have a disability) this document uses the introduction to outline its top 'strategic priorities'. Number one on the CCRC's list is 'people, being an employer of choice'. Or, to put things another way, making sure that members of staff are happy. For an organisation whose raison d'etre is supposed to involve overturning grievous miscarriages of justice, this feels like an odd thing to categorise as a top priority. But like many a public sector organisation before it, the Criminal Cases Review Commission increasingly seems to place the interests of its bloated workforce above those of the public they supposedly serve. Exhibit A, on this front, is its overpaid, under-competent, homeworking CEO. She was last night still refusing to fall on her sword. And so this grotesque scandal continues.
.png%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
19-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Independent readers praise Brexit reset deal – ‘Starmer is showing that Britain can act like a grown-up again'
Independent readers remain divided by Sir Keir Starmer's Brexit reset deal with the EU. But despite some reservations, many have welcomed it as a step toward stability, cooperation, and restoring the UK's global standing. For supporters, the deal marks a significant breakthrough. They praised Starmer's pragmatic leadership and the symbolism of Britain 'acting like a grown-up' again. Several welcomed the cutting of red tape, viewing the agreement as a long-overdue step toward repairing the economic and diplomatic damage caused by previous Brexit deals. Others expressed cautious optimism, noting that while the current agreement is modest, it lays the groundwork for deeper integration. A common sentiment was that the reset puts the UK on the right trajectory, and that rejoining the EU could eventually follow with popular support. Meanwhile, critics argued that the deal doesn't go far enough. Some said it leaves many Brexit burdens in place, such as import duties and the 90/180-day rule, while giving too much away, especially on fishing rights. Brexiteers, including Jacob Rees-Mogg, decried it as a 'surrender,' and some readers worried it makes the UK a 'rule taker' under EU law. Here's what you had to say: Britain can act like a grown-up again Starmer is showing that Britain can act like a grown-up again. Unfortunately, the hard-line Brexiters still cannot admit Brexit has been a disaster, and the vote to leave was nine years ago! Mintman Trade without red tape This is a good deal for the UK. It's the same deal the fishermen got under the Tories. And no one is mourning Australia, New Zealand, and America's free movement of young people. So what is the difference? Or is it that they have a free trade deal with the EU, so our businesses can trade without red tape? mG123 Johnson's deal with the EU settled the fishing matter as follows: Fishing quotas in UK waters are reduced by 25% between 2021 and 2025 and then level off. From 2025, the fish quotas are negotiated once a year, but the UK cannot lower the EU's fishing quotas without the EU's consent. Should the UK lower the EU's quotas without EU consent, the EU can trigger TCA Articles 501 and 506, allowing the EU to immediately suspend part or all of the TCA. The EU Parliament already passed a resolution asking the EU member states to trigger these articles should the UK lower the quotas. Hence, the legal text of Johnson's deal left Starmer with only two options: renew the deal once a year, or renew the deal for multiple years in one go. Send your thank you letters to Johnson. Real European Labour have done pretty well recently. They've managed to come to an agreement with the USA over tariffs. They've reached a trade agreement with India, a huge market. Now they've started to reset trading relations with the EU. The Tories or Reform would never have got this far. All they do is criticise from the corner, like the naughty kid who has been sent out of the room. I'd love to see Badenoch, Farage, the Mail and Express, left with egg on their faces. We wait and see how the fickle British public react. tommy2tops Britain is back on the world stage "Britain is back on the world stage." That says everything about Starmer's genuine mindset. And, of course, he's spot on. Can't say I like the man, but he is doing something very positive, at last. Britain has gone up in the eyes of the world overnight. Cyclone8 Striving for ever greater union The different emphasis in the speeches by Starmer and von der Leyen just shows that for her and most people in EU countries, the EU is about striving for ever greater union between the peoples of Europe... but even for Starmer, the EU is all about transactions and exploiting the best deal. IMHO, most British people are inclined to Starmer's approach. In youth mobility, the UK already has deals with countries like Taiwan and South Korea... future business dealings more important than the actual people involved? EuropeanObserver Unconditional surrender 'Sir' Jacob Rees-Mogg has piped up to call it an 'unconditional surrender'. Of course, he found buckets of wonderful non-surrenderous golden goodies when he was Minister for Brexit Opportunities. He just didn't tell us what they were. Because there were none. Yetigoose Lying Brexiteers Indeed. When lying Brexiteers like Farage and JRM spout about 'surrender', they think we've forgotten what an utter disaster their plan was. By all accounts, it has damaged the UK's GDP by more than 5 per cent, cost us at least £100 billion and made us an international laughing-stock. But the swivel-eyed far-right never had any sense of irony or self-awareness... hayneman Open-ended Brexiteers are absolutely incandescent with rage at this Brexit 'betrayal', but the question on the referendum form in 2016 simply asked: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' (And we left — job done). In reality, this open-ended question could have been interpreted in any way, but I sometimes wonder whether the dwindling band of diehard Brexiters would only have been satisfied with a no-deal Brexit where we reneged on the severance payment deal, followed up by a declaration of war on the EU. KlikKurtis Slapped about the gills with a wet kipper Another kick in the goolies for the Scottish fishing industry, which lands over 60 per cent of white fish for the UK market. The east coast of Scotland fishermen voted for Brexit in the hope that they would reap the rewards, but instead have been slapped about the gills with a wet kipper by both Tory and Labour post-Brexit governments. Nothing is new. Thatcher did the same. Billco Basically nothing... This 'deal' amounts to next to nothing now, and the possibility of just a very little sometime later. Basically, nothing less than a referendum to get authority to start negotiations for re-entry to the EU will be enough for the sizeable majority of this country's population that wants to be in the EU. And yes, before others point it out, that would entail membership of the Euro and Schengen at a minimum to prove our commitment. Even with those requirements, a second (third) confirmatory referendum would be won quite easily. arboreal1 Reform must be rolling on the floor Every 'concession' from the EU in this "reset" – such as allowing UK exports of sausages, minced meat, or easier food checks – is conditional on the UK following EU law, and EU law is interpreted solely by the ECJ. So when the UK chooses to align with those specific EU standards, it also accepts that the ECJ is the final authority on interpreting those rules. Reform must be rolling on the floor with amusement. Uriba A start, but more needs to be done It's a start, but a lot more needs to be done. Using e-gates at airports is the least of the UK's problems – what we need is investment in manufacturing and infrastructure. BlindPew Utterly useless... irreparable damage A deal like this should have been set up eight to ten years ago. But Cameron was too lazy, May was sabotaged by the right wing of her own party (it's the only part of it left), and Johnson was just utterly useless with his half-baked 'deal', which has done irreparable damage to the UK economy. rcourt130864 Starmer lacked grace At last, a positive outcome, but Starmer lacked grace. Von der Leyen's speech was all about the positive side for the UK and the EU, but all Starmer trumpeted was 'British this' and 'Britain that'. Not a word about how it would be good for the EU as well. Plus, he was quick to get in the three red lines, which were obviously intended to appease the unappeasable hard right. Here's the problem for the UK: the EU sees itself as an effort to cooperate for the common good. The UK only looks at the national balance sheet and comes across as entirely self-interested. Starmer did nothing to dispel this. Kenhubert Brexit is now a decomposing wreck Very happy today as we make a great stride towards full EU membership. Now just a matter of time. Brexit is now a decomposing wreck. Keep the faith, keep the pressure on, force a rejoin referendum urgently. voxtrot RIP Brexit All the evidence is that a majority in the UK now see Brexit as a mistake. This UK–EU reset, the first step towards a closer relationship between the UK and EU, hands Badenoch/Tories/Farage/Reformies a bit of a problem: How are they going to sell the idea of reinstating costly, restrictive Brexit sanctions, when the benefits of undoing them have been witnessed, as an election pledge in a couple of years? RIP Brexit. wolfie Is that all? My first impression was 'Is that all?' Pet passports, young people exchanges, e-gates and sausages seem to be very little for all the hype. There must be more to it. Fishermen always complain, but they were terminally stitched up by Farage and Johnson well before Starmer. All in all, it looks at the moment like a puny deal — just right for a nation which is not fully in and not fully out of the EU. The ridiculous 90/180 days rule remains, the discriminatory 'Not for EU consumption' stamp on our food remains, and import duties remain. Pomerol95 Triggering These positive developments are clearly triggering a lot of glitching amongst the isolationist Brexit cultists, led by NF, who would be happy to kneel before Trump and allow the UK to become a MAGA-influenced vassal state. This is pragmatic economic action and good news for the UK, small businesses — and not least our fresh fish and shellfish industry, who need faster export to the EU. Herbacious Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day's top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click 'log in' or 'register' in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.
The Sun
17-05-2025
- Politics
- The Sun
Fury as Labour's new deal with the EU ‘will mean RETURN of freedom of movement by the back door'
BRITAIN'S new deal with the EU stinks and will mean the return of freedom of movement by the back door, critics have warned the PM. Sir Keir Starmer will tomorrow host European leaders for a landmark summit in London where he will reverse large parts of the Brexit deal. 2 Crunch negotiations were going to the wire last night but the deal will include a youth mobility scheme which will let European under-35s live and work in the UK. Britain is also poised to let European trawlermen fish in our waters for years to come and sign up to new EU rules. It could mean UK taxpayers' cash goes into parts of the Brussels budget. Last night, Labour and Tory politicians warned the PM that his deal would 'undermine and sabotage Brexit'. Writing in The Sun on Sunday, Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel branded it the 'great Brexit betrayal'. She added: 'Labour looks set to open our borders and start the process of reintroducing free movement by the back door with some form of youth mobility scheme. 'Labour's plans are not about improving cooperation with our European friends and allies, they're about surrendering control to them.' Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg said: 'This deal stinks. 'A total waving of the white flag. Youth mobility is code for free movement. 'Why chain ourselves to the corpse of the EU?' Sir Keir Starmer has unveiled a sweeping immigration overhaul - vowing to -finally take back control of our borders Labour MP Graham Stringer said: 'I have concerns this undermines the referendum decision. We must not resile from the commitment we gave to honour it.' Reform UK leader Nigel Farage added: 'Ending free movement was what the country voted for — including millions of Labour voters.' Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'This isn't a reset, it's a surrender.' Details of the EU deal are shrouded in secrecy as it is set to be inked tomorrow. But The Sun on Sunday understands it will include a restricted youth mobility scheme — limited in terms of how many Europeans can come to Britain and how long they can live here. A similar scheme in Australia lasts two years and is capped at 42,000 people. And a fishing deal to let European trawlers catch cod in UK waters is set to last over five years, longer than previously thought. In return, Britain wants to be able to bid for EU military and security contracts worth about £125billion. But France is pushing for the UK to be cut out of most of it. The UK will also sign up to EU rules on food so British burgers and sausages can be exported to the continent. Sir Keir said: 'First India, then the US. Tomorrow, we take another step forwards, with yet more benefits for the UK as the result of a strengthened partnership with the European Union.' He added: 'We have a red line in our manifesto. 'Youth mobility is not freedom of movement.'
Telegraph
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Jacob Rees-Mogg ‘would win back old seat if he defected to Reform'
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg would win back his seat in the Commons if he defected to Reform UK, analysis suggests. The former Tory Cabinet minister and ardent Brexiteer is said to be 'agonising' over a possible switch to Nigel Farage 's party to help him stage a parliamentary comeback. Sir Jacob, who lost his Somerset seat in last year's Labour landslide, has previously said he is 'very strongly' considering standing again at the next general election in 2029. But reports suggest he could secure his return sooner with a commanding majority of more than 20,000 if he jumps ship to Reform. The former Tory MP is said to be torn over what to do in the event of a by-election to replace his successor, Labour's Dan Norris, who was arrested on suspicion of rape and child sex offences. However, he appeared to rule out a defection to Reform when asked about the prospect by The Telegraph, insisting: 'I am a Tory to my fingertips.' Possible win by huge margin According to the Mail on Sunday, Reform has calculated that Sir Jacob would win the seat of North East Somerset and Hanham by a huge margin if he ditched the Tories for 'Nigel's gang'. Mr Norris won the newly-created constituency, which replaced Sir Jacob's old seat of North East Somerset, by around 5,000 votes in July. A source told the Mail: 'Jacob would love to represent the constituency again. But if he stands as a Tory with the party as it is now, he will lose. If he joins Nigel's gang, the party calculates he would win a majority of over 20,000. 'Against that is the fact he's a lifelong, loyal Conservative. He is on the horns of an agonising dilemma.' A Reform source hinted that the former MP would be accepted into the party, telling The Telegraph: 'Reform UK would always consider welcoming patriots who align with our views and values.' 'Inappropriate to speculate' Sir Jacob said it is 'inappropriate to speculate on such an eventuality'. He told the Mail: 'My fervent hope remains that my party recovers and becomes once again what it should always be – a genuinely Conservative Party both in spirit and actions. 'Sadly, as the last local elections showed most graphically, many sensible-minded voters simply now believe that Labour and the Conservatives have become almost indistinguishable. Kemi is beginning to change this and that must continue.' The former business secretary and Brexit opportunities minister has previously suggested the Tories should work with Reform to beat Labour. Speaking on the fringes of last year's Conservative Party conference, he said: 'What should we do? Well, let's for once model ourselves on David Cameron and make a big and generous offer… 'What if we were to say at the next election, as we did to the liberal unionists, we will not oppose Reform in those 98 seats? I would certainly be open to that as a real opportunity for Reform to win seats from Labour.'
