UK politics: Starmer accused of ‘sycophantic’ tone towards Chinese as Yang Tengbo denies being a spy – as it happened | Politics

Key events

Early evening summary

We now live in a country where you can assault a Member of Parliament and not go to prison.

The latest example of two-tier justice.

Share

The removal of district councils in England could leave to parish and town councillors playing a bigger role, says Prof Joanie Willett, a local government specialist at the University of Exeter. In a comment on the government’s plans, she says:

Removing borough councils raises questions about the potential for town and parish councils to take a step up in local governance, with a more important profile. This could boost democracy, if town and parish councils can be adequately supported.

Share

And here is some more expert reaction to the English devolution white paper.

From Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive at the LGIU (Local Government Information Unit), a thinktank

The government’s devolution agenda as set out in today’s White Paper is ambitious and far reaching. At LGIU, we have for many years argued that complex problems find their best solutions locally and that power needs to be devolved from Whitehall to our regions, councils and communities. Localism is both a democratic good and a better way of getting things done.

On that basis, we welcome the white paper’s intent and direction of travel, though we believe it should also include a real commitment to fiscal devolution.

From Akash Paun, programme director for devolution at the Institute for Government thinktank

Empowering metro mayors to lead on strategic planning for their regions is sensible and could be crucial for the government’s ability to meet its growth and home-building targets – the Institute for Government has long argued that mayors are well-placed to develop and deliver regional plans for housing, transport and other infrastructure.

It is also important that the government extends devolution to the 50% of England that has so far been left out.

We welcome the publication of the white paper. But devolution is no magic bullet. To make this work, the government also needs to invest properly in institutional capacity and new accountability systems at the devolved level.

From Cllr John Merry, chair of Key Cities, a network of smallish cities, mostly Labour run

Devolution is a powerful tool for driving the local growth this country desperately needs, but its success hinges on recognising the diversity of UK cities and regions.

That’s why Key Cities supports large parts of the devolution bill, which will empower many of our local leaders. However, our members are concerned that a “one-size-fits-all” model could have a counter-intuitive effect. Our 2024 survey of our network (covering approximately 10% of the UK population), found that a quarter of city members would like to better understand how such a model would be applied in very different and unique geographic areas, and for a third it would be undesirable to go down the route of a combined authority (20% are already in a combined authority).

Share

Minister confirms local government reorganisation could lead to some elections being postponed

Jim McMahon, the local government minister, has been make a Commons statement about the English devolution white paper. In response to a question from Harriett Baldwin (Con) about whether council elections might be cancelled next year, McMahon said that if councils came to government with a credible plan for reorganisation, then elections the year after might be postponed to allow for alternative elections to take place for the shadow authority that would replace the county and district councils (in a two-tier area). But he said there would be no “mass cancellations of elections for the sake of it”.

Election Maps UK, a social media account that provides excellent local elections coverage, points out that, if anyone thinks Labour is cancelling elections to keep Labour in power at county council level, they are wrong.

Before there’s a tinfoil hat shortage, a reminder of who currently controls County Councils in England:

Conservative: 19
Lib Dem: 2
Labour: 0

If this were a Government plot to ‘cancel democracy’, they wouldn’t even be benefitting anywhere… pic.twitter.com/HQt9xutHiu

— Election Maps UK (@ElectionMapsUK) December 16, 2024

Before there’s a tinfoil hat shortage, a reminder of who currently controls County Councils in England:

Conservative: 19

Lib Dem: 2

Labour: 0

If this were a Government plot to ‘cancel democracy’, they wouldn’t even be benefitting anywhere…

FWIW there is precedent for this. Council elections in North Yorkshire, Somerset, Cumberland, and Westmorland & Furness were postponed in February 2021 – 3 months before scheduled elections – for the same reason (transition from CC to UA).

Share

English devolution plans undemocratic, Tories and Greens claim

The Conservative party has criticised the English devolution white paper on the grounds that reorganisation will be imposed on local communities if they cannot agree. (See 2.04pm.) A Conservative party spokesperson said:

The Conservatives believe in local democracy. Under the last Government devolution was extended across England, and councils which wanted to unitarise were supported to do so.

Angela Rayner’s announcement is part of a plan by Labour to strip councils of their powers to make choices and to impose reorganisation from Westminster without local consent.

The Green party has also claimed the plans are undemocratic. This is from Adrian Ramsay, the Green party’s co-leader, echoing some of the points made by the District Councils’ Network. (See 4.58pm.)

Local democracy is in urgent need of reform but this White Paper does not deliver the real change our local councils need.

It steals power away from local people and risks making the real changes required harder to achieve, including building the homes we need, cleaning our rivers, reforming social care and greening our local economies.

We should trust local communities to make the right decisions on homes, food, energy, nature and adapting to the climate crisis.

Instead, these plans risk moving power away from local councils to huge remote super councils and regional mayors.

And the Liberal Democrats have criticised the plans for neglecting social care (a priority issue for the party). Vikki Slade, the party’s local government spokesperson, said:

Council budgets are on the brink. The previous Conservative government pushed so many local authorities to the edge of bankruptcy.

Without properly investing in social care more of the vital services that councils provide will disappear to those who desperately need them.

Share

Services like park and leisure centres at risk from Labour’s local government reorganisation, district councils claim

Organisations representing councils in England are divided over the plans in the English devolution white paper to get rid of the remaining two-tier council areas.

In areas with county councils and district councils operating alongside each other, the government wants new unitary councils, which in most cases, it says, will mean “creating councils with a population of 500,000 or more”.

This councils may therefore look more like county councils than district councils and that explains why the County Councils Network is more enthusiastic. Tim Oliver, its chair, said in a statement:

We welcome the white paper outlining that new unitary councils should have a population of 500,000 or more. We look forward to further details on the criteria and process for reorganisation, but with council finances under severe strain it is imperative that reform ensures that new unitary councils have the size and scale necessary to deliver substantial long-term savings, minimise disruption to care services and maintain strong tax bases well into the future. Any decisions on local government reorganisation by ministers must be evidence-based and ensure that county councils are not split into multiple small unitary councils that cannot fulfil the ambitions of this white paper.

But the District Councils’ Network is much more critical. Its chair, Sam Chapman-Allen, said:

District councils are close to communities, which makes us responsive, approachable, trusted and understanding of local needs. The danger is that all of this is lost in the top-down imposition of mega councils – regional, rather than local government covering many hundreds of thousands or even millions of people. Bigger isn’t intrinsically better.

While we welcome the government’s commitment to extend devolution England-wide, the imposition of mega councils with a minimum population of 500,000 is the opposite of devolution, taking powers away from local communities.

Chapman-Allen also claimed the reorganisation could put local services at risk.

Services including parks, leisure centres, street cleaning and waste collection are hugely valued by our local communities and bring about local pride and prosperity – but the danger is that new unitary councils have no option but to cut them to withstand growing social care costs.

Social care’s funding crisis must be resolved urgently but not at the expense of services such as housing and planning, which are integral to the government’s house-building goals, and work to build local economies, which contributes to the government’s aim to grow the national economy. The danger is that local work to prevent ill-health and homelessness, which saves the rest of the public sector millions of pounds, also has to be scaled back.

Oliver and Chapman-Allen are both Conservative councillors, although the CCN and the DCN are both cross-party organisations.

Share

Updated at 12.38 EST

Tom Tugendhat, the former security minister, told MPs that when he was in office in the last government, he was told by officials that FIRS would be ready to launch at the end of this year. He said the only thing that changed was the party in power.

He also said that, if China was not in the enhanced tier, “it’s not worth having”.

Jarvis said that he had known Tugendhat a long time, and was asking him to trust him when he said officials told them the scheme was not “ready to go” when Labour took office.

Share

Updated at 11.39 EST

Paul Waugh (Lab) said that Chris Philp should be criticising his own party for sycophancy towards China. (See 4.04pm.) He said, when he was working as a journalist before he became an MP, he was with Theresa May when she visited China. And May was praised by Chinese state media because she sidelined human rights issues, he said.

Share

Christine Jardine from the Liberal Democrats asked Jarvis for an assurance that the government would not weaken its stance on human rights in dealings with China.

Jarvis said the government had to “weigh a number of considerations” when dealing with China, but that national security would always come first.

Share

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp accuses Starmer of adopting ‘sycophantic’ tone with Chinese president

Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said he was grateful to the government for arranging a security briefing for him on this story earlier today.

He urged the government to implement FIRS quickly.

And he called for a rethink in its China policy.

Given what we’ve learned and what we know, these very close relations that the prime minister is apparently attempting may not be wise, and the rather sycophantic tone the prime minister took with President Xi at the G20 a few weeks ago may not be very wise in light of what we now.

Jarvis said he did not agree with this assessment. Referring to what happened when David Cameron was prime minister, and he hosted President Xi during his visit to the UK, Jarvis said:

At least (Keir Starmer) least he did not take him to the pub for a pint.

Share

Jarvis says Home Office will soon set out how ‘enhanced sphere’ of foreign influence scheme will be used

Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader who tabled the UQ, said that there are 40,000 people working for the Chinese United Front Work Department. They have penetrated every sector of the economy, he says.

He urged the government to put China in the enhanced sphere for FIRS (ie, to subject to to extra checks, because of the higher risk it poses). He said Tom Tugendhat, the former security minister, has said the last government was about to put China on the list in this category.

And he said the UK was buying solar panels from China made with slave labour. “Far from challenging China on human rights, it now appears we are turning a blind eye to them,” he said.

In response, Dan Jarvis, the Home Office minister, said FIRS was not ready to go live when Labour took office. He said the plans were “not sufficiently robust”.

As for whether China would be included in the enhanced sphere, he said the Home Office would be setting out its approach to using this sphere in due course.

Share

Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, tells Jarvis that the government should have agreed to give a statement on this. It should not just be responding to an urgent question, he says.

And he tells Iain Duncan Smith that he should not have told the media in advance about his plan to table this UQ.

Share

Security minister Dan Jarvis tells MPs foreign influence registration scheme won’t be operational until summer 2025

Dan Jarvis, the security minister, is responding. He says the government is glad that the Home Office’s decision to exclude Yang Tengbo in this case was upheld by the courts.

He says the head of MI5 has said the UK is facing the most complex threat environment he has ever seen.

The National Security Act is essential, he says. He says six people have already been charged under the Act.

And, on China, he says the government’s position is to challenge where it must, compete where it has to, and cooperate where it can.

He says the details of the foreign influence registration scheme (FIRS) will be set out in the new year, and the scheme will come operational in the summer, he says.

Share

Updated at 11.29 EST

Speaker tells MPs not to criticise Prince Andrew ahead of urgent question on alleged Chinese spy

Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, says the Commons starts court sub judice rules. It is important that MPs do not subvert what courts have to decide, he says.

He says a court has decided to lift the anonymity ruling in the case of the alleged Chinese spy.

He also says MPs are only allowed to criticise the conduct of members of the royal family when they are debating a substantive motion covering that. That is not the case this afternoon, he says.

Share

The Commons urgent question on China will start imminently.

Share

Badenoch says replacing most taxes with flat tax ‘very attractive’ in principle – but currently unaffordable

Kemi Badenoch has said that she finds the idea of introducing a flat tax “very attractive” in principle – but unaffordable at present.

She made the comment in response to a question at the event this afternoon organised for groups campaigning about the extension of inhertance tax to farms. Asked by a business owner if she would consider getting rid of most taxes and replacing them with a flat tax, a single rate of income tax for everyone, she replied:

This is an idea that I’ve heard many times. It’s very attractive, but if we’re going to get to that sort of scenario, there’s a lot of work we need to do first hand.

At the moment, we are a welfare state with a little bit of a productivity attached to it. We’ve got to turn that around.

We cannot afford flat taxes where we are now. We need to make sure we rewire our economy so that we can lighten the burden of tax and the regulation on individuals and on those businesses that are just starting out, in particular.

People see the businesses that close. They don’t see the businesses that never started in the first place.

Tory rightwingers have long been attracted by the idea of a flat tax. When Liz Truss was preparing to take over as prime minister, Jacob Rees Mogg urged her to get rid of all direct taxes and replace them with a flat rate of income tax, set at 20p in the pound. He was inspired by the version in Estonia and he claimed it would cost £41bn. Truss reportedly described this as a “great idea”, but even she drew the line at implementing.

As well as cost, another disadvantage with flat taxes is that they do not allow scope for exemptions – like the one farmers have enjoyed from inheritance tax.

Share

Updated at 10.29 EST

What Rayner says about ‘unprecedented new powers’ being given to mayors in England

In her speech this afternoon Angela Rayner, the deputy PM, said that, as well as extending the number of mayoral authorities, she would be given them “unprecedented new powers”. Here is the passage from the speech where she explained what those powers would be.

Too often, mayors hands are tied by Whitehall … So we will create a clear and transparent route for all mayoral combined authorities to receive an integrated settlement.

This means moving resources between projects that matches what the people need.

We will give mayors new powers over strategic planning and new call-in powers so that they can build the homes we need and plan for growth on a larger scale.

And we will get mayors working more closely with Homes England to unlock new homes.

The most mature areas will be able to set the strategic direction of any future affordable homes programme.

We will devolve future funding to support regeneration and housing delivery, and we will consolidate adult skills funding, introducing joint ownership of the local skills improvement plan and new routes to influence 16 to 19 provision.

And we will devote funding to support economically inactive people into work, and funding for retrofit will be included in the integrated settlements by the end of the parliament.

We will also create a statutory role for mayors in governing the rail network, with a right to request on rail devolution.

This all means easier commutes, across more joined-up transport links, new homes properly connected to local infrastructure and skills provision that matches local job opportunities.

And this is how she summed up the plans.

We have an economy that hoards potential and a politics that hoards power. So our devolution revolution will deliver the greatest transfer of power from Whitehall to our communities in a generation, empowering those communities to realise their potential.

No other government has been this ambitious about devolution, a mission that binds all departments across government, a long-term mission over generations rather than a short-term fix.

Share