Latest news with #SentencingCouncil
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Top Tory ‘attack dog' or coiled viper? The Robert Jenrick conundrum
Standing in a field in Romford at the crack of dawn last week, Robert Jenrick watched as police raided the vans of car boot salesmen who were suspected of handling stolen tools. The shadow justice secretary had received a tip-off from a tradesman's social media account that the site was a hotspot for criminal activity, and decided to do something about it. As an immigration minister in Rishi Sunak's government, Jenrick was accustomed to attending police 'dawn raids', organised by his officials. Now, as an opposition MP, he had been forced to take matters into his own hands. He visited the area 'undercover', taking videos later used on his social media page, then contacted Essex Police to encourage them to launch an operation. The police swoop, also documented on Jenrick's social media accounts, recovered £150,000 of suspected stolen tools. It was, in the words of his team, just one of many recent 'wins'. It may have been a win for Jenrick personally. Whether it was also one for his party leader, Kemi Badenoch, is more complicated. Jenrick's unorthodox approach to opposition politics has raised eyebrows on the party's backbenches since he was appointed to her team last November. Among the shadow cabinet assembled out of the wreckage of last July's election defeat, the 43-year-old is by far the most vocal. Supportive colleagues say he is boosting the profile of Tories in opposition – which is no mean feat with Nigel Farage waiting in the wings. But others say he is, to use the perennial Westminster expression, 'on manoeuvres'. Most days of the week, Jenrick pumps out videos of himself walking along the street, often in a suit, talking about political issues he hopes will gather public momentum. The videos, shot by the 21-year-old university student Dov Forman, show the shadow justice secretary ranging widely across policy areas – many of which are not covered in his brief. Recent topics – described by his team as other 'wins' – include a man charged for harassing the 'religious institution of Islam' after he burned a Koran in the street, and the Sentencing Council's plan to create 'two-tier' rules on criminals of different races. Both campaigns produced results. The charges against the man were changed, in a quiet admission from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) that Jenrick was right to complain of a 'backdoor blasphemy law'. And the Sentencing Council suspended its new guidelines after Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, joined his calls to scrap them. The videos have given Jenrick a significant following on social media. In the last year, his posts have received 200 million views on X and 20 million on Facebook. His team said 85 per cent of the audience is based in the UK. Among Conservative MPs, there is a collective understanding that anything that lands a glove on Sir Keir Starmer is good for the party, and other shadow cabinet ministers with few social media followers and little appetite for a scrap with the Government are under fire from their backbench colleagues. 'To me, Rob's performance demonstrates the invisibility of many of the others,' says one MP. 'The one consensus is that the shadow cabinet is massively underperforming. Rob is not.' Another senior party figure adds: 'I wish more of the shadow cabinet were doing this. 'Some of the leadership candidates decided to flounce off [after Badenoch won], but he stayed to help. All power to his elbow.' The latest popularity poll by ConservativeHome, the grassroots Tory Bible, found on Friday that Jenrick was the most popular shadow cabinet minister among the party's membership, and is 25 points ahead of his closest rival, Chris Philp. Badenoch, after a bruising set of local election results, has an approval rating of zero. Three of the shadow ministers most complained about by MPs – Gareth Bacon, Helen Whately and Ed Argar – are in negative figures. It is no wonder that, in light of his performance, some MPs have begun to wonder if a shadow Tory high command is operating out of Jenrick's poky Palace of Westminster office, which backs onto the River Thames. 'Rob looks for wins every day,' says a source close to him. 'That's the mantra. He believes we have to take the fight to our opponents and that we can't just sit back while Labour fail. 'We are always looking for something where we can make a difference, force a change and be more effective than Reform. He's not afraid to scrap and fight dirty – it gets results.' One of the key differences between Jenrick and Tory HQ in Matthew Parker Street is the line he takes on Reform. Farage has made it his main mission to gut the Conservative Party and become the 'main opposition' to Labour. With just five MPs, his claim to have already supplanted the Tories is overblown. But Conservative members are concerned by polling that shows many of them losing their seats at the next election to the 'Reformquake' – and blame their leader, Badenoch. 'People have been quietly unimpressed with how things have been going for a while, but after the local election results, a lot of people are furious, and some of them want Kemi gone already,' says one MP. Unlike Tory strategists who privately describe Farage as a populist running a protest party, Jenrick has focused heavily on illegal migration, Reform's main talking point, and embraced his opponent's personal style of campaigning. He is more likely to describe Farage as a politician who should be 'sent back to retirement'. Months after a bitter US election campaign dominated by rows about age and mental acuity, allies feel voters should be pointed to the fact that the Reform leader is 61, and will be 65 by the next election. He has also gone further than any of his front bench colleagues in suggesting that there should be a pact between the two parties. In a leaked recording published last month, Jenrick said he wanted the 'fight' against Labour to be 'united' and he was 'determined' to 'bring this coalition together'. A freewheeling – but popular – shadow justice secretary presents an interesting challenge for Badenoch. While she benefits from his campaigning, the Tory leader is well aware he still harbours ambitions to take her job if or when she falls. One party source pointed out that Jenrick is fiercely ambitious, and has made no secret of his desire to lead the country one day. His wife, the lawyer Michal Berkner, jokes to friends that she married him because she thought he would become Prime Minister. Jenrick's team says his sense of ambition comes from his relatively humble upbringing, compared to many of his colleagues, and an early interest in politics that drove him to seek election in the Conservative Association at Cambridge. 'Rob's upbringing in Wolverhampton and his family obviously shape his politics, but he's his own man with his own views,' his spokesman says. Another source who claimed to have knowledge of Jenrick's thinking says the shadow justice secretary was pleased he had lost last year's leadership election – knowing that the task of rebuilding the Conservatives in opposition would be long and thankless. Jenrick is instead said to be something of a coiled viper, waiting for his chance to strike when the time is right. In the meantime, he has taken up boxing in east London once a week with an Iranian trainer named 'Razor Ali'. The spokesman for Jenrick denies suggestions he is poised for another run at the leadership, pointing to the fact that he was on the morning broadcast round the day after the local elections, defending Badenoch. A sense of tension between the two has nonetheless bubbled away in recent headlines about the Conservatives' attempt to gain ground on Reform. After his comments hinting at a pact with Farage, Badenoch's spokesman was asked whether she considered him to be a 'team player'. The aide responded: 'Yes, the shadow cabinet is a well-functioning team.' Some in the party point out that whether she views him as trustworthy or not is irrelevant, as either way, she cannot sack him without making a powerful enemy on the backbenches. Others have concerns about any future leadership bid, after his open revolt against Rishi Sunak's government before last year's election. That was when, after resigning from the Home Office, Jenrick went on the offensive, telling broadcasters that the former prime minister's flagship Rwanda policy 'won't work'. '[Jenrick] spent six months after he left campaigning against his own party,' says one source who worked in the previous Conservative Government. 'That discounts him from the leadership, in my view.' Sources close to Jenrick insist that Sunak's migration policy was wrong, and that the failure of the Rwanda policy vindicates his decision. It is also true that Badenoch is safer than her predecessors from a leadership challenge, after the Conservative Party changed its rules to make it more difficult to hold an election. More MPs must now sign a letter to the chair of the 1922 committee to remove a leader, and anyone who sees off a challenge is safe from another election for a year. 'There is no mechanism for her to go,' says one MP, who adds that many colleagues would like her gone regardless. On the miserable Tory benches, there is no enthusiasm for more party infighting, and most MPs regard the headlines about shadow cabinet competition with despair. Conservatives know their main electoral competition now comes from Farage, not Labour, and that they face the genuine threat of extinction without a rapid rebrand – described by Badenoch as 'renewal'. At some point, Jenrick's ambition looks certain to produce the familiar fireworks of a leadership race. But for now, he looks set to keep picking up momentum by taking on issues faster and more aggressively than anyone else. 'He's energetic and he wants to get out there and prosecute our argument,' says a friend. 'In opposition Labour had a team of attack dogs that went for us every day. He's returning the favour.' 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.
Daily Mail
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Jailed migrants could avoid deportation under 'watered down' sentencing laws, Tories claim
Hundreds of convicted migrants could avoid deportation each year after the 'watering down' of Sentencing Council guidelines, Robert Jenrick has warned. The quango is said to have approved the 'lax' rules despite fears they will result in those convicted of immigration offences avoiding deportation. Under the new guidelines, judges will be advised to give sentences of less than 12 months in prison for several. Twelve months is the point at which convicted foreign nationals can face deportation. Mr Jenrick, the Tories ' justice spokesman, said 'watering down' the sentences meant hundreds of offenders would avoid the threshold for automatic deportation each year. He added: 'The Justice Secretary's representative signed this off, and now our borders will be blown further open. The only people benefiting from this Labour Government are the trade unionists, criminals and illegal migrants. 'Sir Keir Starmer must accept my Bill to block these ludicrous guidelines and sack the members of the Sentencing Council responsible for yet more madness.' It is the latest row over guidelines from the Sentencing Council after concerns special treatment was being given depending on age, sex and ethnicity of offenders. The Conservatives said the council's proposals on four key immigration offences now advise judges to give sentences of less than 12 months, despite the maximum available being much higher. The offence of knowingly entering the UK without permission carries a maximum custodial sentence of four years, but the council's guidelines say the starting point should be just six months. The Sentencing Council said the guidelines reflected current sentencing practice for less serious offending while proposing higher sentences for the most serious cases. It added that they were only draft guidelines. The Ministry of Justice said: 'This Government is committed to deporting eligible foreign national offenders as quickly as possible.'
Times
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Times
Convicted migrants could avoid deportation under new guidelines
Hundreds of migrants could avoid deportation each year, the Conservatives have warned after the Sentencing Council finalised its new guidelines. Minutes of a meeting of the council show it has approved new advice that will be sent to judges later this year advising them on immigration offences for the first time. The guidelines suggest sentence lengths that are significantly lower than the maximum sentences legislated by parliament. It will advise judges to give sentences of less than 12 months despite the maximum allowed in UK law being considerably higher. This timeframe is significant because, under UK law, foreign nationals who are sentenced to more than 12 months in jail are eligible for deportation. The guidance also sets out that an offender's 'first offence' should be
Sky News
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Sky News
Politics latest: UK and US have agreed trade deal, Sky News understands
Government accused of 'running scared of right-wingers' over sentencing bill The government has been accused of "running scared" over its bill to block new sentencing guidelines. In a debate held on the government's bill today, peers accused Labour of trying to "feed a culture war" and warned they are "damaging public understanding". What is the row over sentencing all about about? Labour's Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-Sentence Reporters) Bill has been introduced to block recommendations from the Sentencing Council. The independent body recommended that a pre-sentence report should be prepared before offenders from ethnic, cultural or faith minorities are sentenced. These reports provide information about the perpetrator's background, circumstances of the offence, the risky they pose and the suitability of different types of sentence - and are already in use for some cases. The body argued that these should become more routine for certain groups due to disparities in how different people are sentenced. Watch: The shadow justice secretary calls the guidelines 'blatant bias against straight, white men' The Lammy Review, a 2017 report, found that those from minority backgrounds were more likely to face harsher sentences than their counterparts. But following the announcement from the Council, the Conservatives said it would lead to differential treatment under law and a "two-tier" justice system. The government then introduced their bill to block the new guidelines and it means that the Council's recommendations will not come into effect while parliament considers the legislation. 'The government is running scared of these nasty right-wingers' During a second reading of the bill in the Lords today, Green Party Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb accused the government of trying to "interfere" in the workings of an independent body. She said: "The Sentencing Council is an independent body that saw a problem and tried to do something about it. "It has done what it was designed to do and now the Labour government is running scared of these rather nasty right-wingers who are trying to interfere. "We do not have equality under the law", she added. "We've known about women being less fairly treated for decades, with women being imprisoned for things that men would not be. "The Sentencing Council came up with the mildest of changes to address that issue and has been slammed for it." Baroness Jenny Jones said that "everybody wants" equality under the law and said that is what the advice of the Council is seeking to implement. The Bishop of Gloucester meanwhile branded the bill "theatrical" and said it has been brought about by the "am-dram of politics". The Rt Rev Rachel Treweek said everybody should receive a pre-sentence report in an ideal world, but said that it "makes sense to prioritise those that we know are especially vulnerable". She added: "The use of the Sentencing Council guidelines to apparently feed a culture war is distressing, and the allegation of two-tier sentencing based around race, religion, belief or cultural background is so damaging to public understanding." The government is aiming to ensure equality before the law Responding, prisons minister Lord Timpson said: "Implementing a sentencing guideline, which could lead to differential treatment before the law, puts trust in the legal system at risk, which is why we acted quickly to address this. "The Government's objective is to help ensure equality before the law. We are clear that an offender should be judged by a court on an individual basis according to the particular facts and circumstances of their case. "Any reference to preferential treatment for a particular cohort is unacceptable."
Belfast Telegraph
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Belfast Telegraph
Government accused of ‘running scared' over bid to block sentencing guidelines
New guidance from the independent Sentencing Council would have recommended a pre-sentence report (PSR) be sought before sentencing offenders from ethnic, cultural or faith minorities. Pre-sentence reports provide information about the offender's background, circumstances of their offence, the risk they pose and suitability for certain types of sentence. The use of these reports has been linked to higher rate of community, rather than prison sentences. The Government brought forward the Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reporters) Bill to block the new guidelines, arguing that it would lead to a differential treatment under the law and a 'two-tier' justice system. The implementation of the updated rulebook has been put on hold to allow Parliament to consider this legislation. However, supporters of the guidance argued that the UK already has a 'two-tier' justice system, due to entrenched racial bias. The Lammy Review, published in 2017, found disparities in outcome across the justice system for those from minority backgrounds compared to their white counterparts, including in sentencing. As the House of Lords debated the Government's Bill during its second reading, Green Party peer Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb argued that politicians were trying to 'interfere' with the workings of an independent body. She said: 'The Sentencing Council is an independent body that saw a problem and tried to do something about it. 'It has done what it was designed to do and now the Labour Government is running scared of these rather nasty right-wingers who are trying to interfere. 'I think it was Elon Musk, perhaps amongst others, who first said that Britain had a two-tier justice system. 'And he was right, that is exactly what we have, because some groups are worse treated than others. 'We do not have equality under the law. 'We've known about women being less fairly treated for decades, with women being imprisoned for things that men would not be. 'The Sentencing Council came up with the mildest of changes to address that issue and has been slammed for it…. 'When the Government says it wants equality under the law, everybody wants that. 'But the difference is that I accept the evidence that we currently have a two-tier system of justice where you can end up receiving worse treatment because you're a woman or because of the colour of your skin.' The Bishop of Gloucester, the Anglican bishop for prisons, branded the Bill 'theatrical' and unnecessary, brought on by 'am-dram politics'. The Rt Rev Rachel Treweek said: 'In a world of sufficient resources, there would be comprehensive pre-sentencing reports for everyone to which careful attention was paid in court. 'But if we have to prioritise PSRs, then it makes sense to prioritise those that we know are especially vulnerable or where there is evidence of disproportionate outcomes from the justice system.' Referring to the Lammy Review, she asked: 'Does the Government believe the issues raised in the landmark report by the current Foreign Secretary almost eight years ago are now a thing of the past? 'Is there no role for judges in mitigating the issues raised in that report? 'The use of the Sentencing Council guidelines to apparently feed a culture war is distressing, and the allegation of two-tier sentencing based around race, religion, belief or cultural background is so damaging to public understanding… 'We cannot pretend that circumstances and characteristics do not matter.' However, unaffiliated peer Baroness Fox of Buckley hit back at the culture war argument, branding it a 'slur'. She said: 'The popular critique of criminal justice as 'two-tier', that actually really resonated, particularly in relation to the sentencing post-last summer's riots, was sneeringly dismissed as a far-right conspiratorial myth by many ministers and politicians. 'It was written off as some culture wars trope, and we've heard similar slurs here today.' She criticised the 'tendency to try and use criminal justice to compensate for perceived racial unfairness and alleged social injustices'. Responding, prisons minister Lord Timpson said: 'Implementing a sentencing guideline, which could lead to differential treatment before the law, puts trust in the legal system at risk, which is why we acted quickly to address this… 'The Government's objective is to help ensure equality before the law. We are clear that an offender should be judged by a court on an individual basis according to the particular facts and circumstances of their case. 'It is not for the Sentencing Council to set in guidance that judgments should be made on the basis of personal characteristics like race or ethnicity. 'Any reference to preferential treatment for a particular cohort is unacceptable.' He insisted that tackling disproportionate outcomes within the criminal justice system is 'a policy matter' to be determined by the Government, not judges. However, he acknowledged the need to tackle inequalities and told peers that the Government has commissioned a review into data held by the Ministry of Justice on racial disparities and will 'carefully consider next steps'.
