‘Shockingly Cruel’: Fury As Rishi Sunak Gives In To Tory Right On Migrant Deportations

Rishi Sunak’s move to ignore human rights judges on migrant deportations has been slammed as “shockingly cruel”.

The prime minister has reportedly caved to Tory rebels and agreed to amend his controversial Illegal Migration Bill so ministers can ignore European judges.

Conservative backbenchers said they reached a deal with Sunak to change new rules to remove migrants arriving on small boats after threatening to revolt over the legislation.

However, the move has sparked a fierce backlash from experts who say it will undermine the rule of law.

Human rights group Liberty described the move as “pathetic political chess playing”, adding: “This shockingly cruel and shameful move will allow the government to knowingly commit human rights abuses and put people in harm’s way.

“A new low, even by the standards of this government for whom lows come thick and fast.

“Reported edits to the government’s Migration Bill will allow ministers to ignore ‘interim measures’ from the European Court of Human Rights that ground deportation flight.

“The court only makes these measures to urgently protect people from irreversible harm – like torture or death.

“Protecting people isn’t controversial. This is the government knowingly putting people’s lives at risk for cheap political points.”

Among the measures reportedly agreed is a plan to give the home secretary powers to disregard injunctions from the European Court of Human Rights – so-called Rule 39 orders.

A former Lord Chief Justice and the Law Society of England and Wales have also expressed concern.

Lord Thomas, a cross-bench peer who headed the judiciary between 2013 and 2017, warned that the proposals could face defeat in the Lords, and that such a move would set “an extraordinarily bad example”.

“I think it is a very serious step for the government to be contemplating putting into force,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Defending the principle of the European Court of Human Rights, he said the fact of interim decisions in some cases “does not in any way detract from the importance of a judgment being made by a court”.

“Many people would say having the power to ignore a court order is something – unless the circumstances were quite extraordinary – this is a step a government should never take because it is symbolic of a breach of the rule of law.”

Richard Atkinson, the deputy vice-president of the Law Society of England and Wales, said he was concerned that the UK was heading towards a “clear and serious breach of international law”.

The bill has proved hugely controversial with critics warning it leaves the UK foul of its international obligations and right-wing Tories arguing it does not go far enough.

More moderate Tory MPs want the prime minister to commit to establishing safe routes via which asylum seekers can come to Britain.

The bill is aimed at changing the law to make it clear people arriving in the UK illegally will not be able to remain in the country.

A government spokesperson said: “The prime minister and home secretary are focused on delivering the five priorities for 2023 – halving inflation, growing the economy, reducing debt, cutting waiting lists and stopping the boats.

“While we have been clear there is no silver bullet, our Stop the Boats Bill will ensure anyone arriving illegally will be detained and swiftly removed, ending the unfair practice of people skipping the queue.”

Share Button

Why Critics Say Photo ID Law Amounts To ‘Voter Suppression’ To Benefit The Tories

The government has introduced new compulsory ID rules for those voting in person during England’s local elections next month – but the move has sparked criticism that more marginalised communities will face fresh challenges to vote.

The government has said the move will prevent voter fraud and protect democracy. But opposition parties and campaigners claim the plan is based on a false premise that actually amounts to “voter suppression” – locking out millions of voters without ID out of the democratic process.

As campaigners delivered a petition to Downing Street calling on the government to “urgently scrap” the new rules, here’s what we know about the controversial move.

What is happening?

Those turning up at polling stations will be required to show a form of photo identification, such as a passport, driving licence or blue badge.

The voter ID rules apply to England as of the May 4 local elections and will come into force for UK general elections from October.

The government predicts the policy will add £180 million to the cost of running elections over the course of a decade.

More than 8,000 council seats in England are up for grabs across 230 local authorities, ranging from small rural areas to some of the largest towns and cities. Polls are also taking place to choose mayors in Bedford, Leicester, Mansfield and Middlesbrough.

Is there any evidence of voter fraud?

The UK has very low levels of proven electoral fraud – during last year’s local and mayoral elections, there was not a single proven case of in-person voter fraud.

Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner has pointed out voter personation, the form of fraud the regulations are aimed at stopping, is “vanishingly rare”.

She said: adding: “Over the last 10 years there have been about 243 million votes cast in elections, and how many people have been convicted of voter fraud? Four. That is 0.0000005%.”

“You are more likely to be hit by lightning 54 times than fall victim to voter personation fraud,” she added.

Why are people claiming this is ‘voter suppression’?

Members of marginalised groups are less likely to have ID, according to campaigners, with women, those living in urban areas, and people under 20 and over 65 are less likely to hold a driving licence. A recent Department for Transport survey found that only 53% of the Black population hold a driving licence, compared with 76% of the white population.

But there’s another element that critics argue shows a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise young people. Bus and travel passes for older and disabled people are being accepted as photo IDs – but the young people’s travel cards is not being permitted.

Long established polling suggests these groups are less likely to vote Conservative.

The Bafta Award-winning creator of The Thick Of It, Armando Ianucci, has also thrown his weight behind the campaign opposing voter ID laws.

He recently tweeted a picture of the back of a polling card which set out the list of acceptable forms of voter ID, and wrote: “Card gives many options for elderly or those with disability. None, NONE, for younger or student voters. The policy is simply biased against younger voters, designed to suppress their vote.”

The organisers of the petition, which has over 100,000 signatures, include campaign groups Unlock Democracy, the Electoral Reform Society, Open Britain and Fair Vote UK.

Representatives of the campaign groups were joined by Labour Party MP Richard Burgon, Liberal Democrat MPs Alistair Carmichael and Sarah Green, and the Green Party peer Jenny Jones.

Jones said: “The government has actually perpetrated voter fraud.

“They have pushed through a bill that is going to prevent certain groups, particularly younger people, from voting.”

Burgon described the voter ID programme as a “draconian, authoritarian attack” on voting rights.

Carmichael dismissed the suggestion that requiring photo ID at the polls is necessary to prevent voter fraud, stating: “It is a solution in search of a problem. We have no historic problem with voter impersonation in this country.”

Do people know about the changes?

A study commissioned by the Local Government Information Unit (LGIU) found that there is confusion over what forms of identification will be accepted under the new voting rules.

A poll by Ipsos found that more than a third of English adults incorrectly thought a student card would be accepted, while 30% wrongly thought their poll card would be valid.

Those thinking a polling card would suffice rose to 42% among those aged 18-34 and half of ethnic minorities.

Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of the LGIU, said: “In spite of a public awareness campaign, 41% of people have heard little or nothing about new voter ID requirements being introduced for the upcoming local elections in England.”

What could the impact be?

Experts have suggested that given the low level of personation offences, and the limited impact on election results of such offences thus far, mean the main impact will be to prevent a large number of people from voting.

At two trials of voter ID in the 2018 and 2019 local elections, more than 1,000 would-be voters were turned away from polling stations and did not return.

What are the authorities doing?

The Electoral Commission, which oversees elections, has been running a campaign urging voters to prepare for the changes, with adverts on TV, radio, billboards and online. The televised advert says people must take ID to ballot boxes in the future, and those without can apply for a free certificate to vote.

But take-up of the so-called Voter Authority Certificate has been limited. As of Wednesday, the number of people who have applied for a certificate is 69,852. This falls far short of the government’s estimate of around 4% of the population, equating to 2.1 million people, who do not have a valid form of photo ID.

Defending its decision to push ahead with voter ID, a government spokesperson said: “We cannot be complacent when it comes to ensuring our democracy remains secure.

“Everyone eligible to vote will have the opportunity to do so and 98% of electors already have an accepted form of identification.

“Photo identification has been used in Northern Ireland elections since 2003 and we’re working closely with the sector to support the rollout and funding the necessary equipment and staffing.”

Share Button

Colin Beattie Quits As SNP Treasurer Following Police Arrest

The SNP’s treasurer has quit after being arrested by police investigating the party’s finances.

Colin Beattie, who is also a member of the Scottish Parliament, said it was “the right decision to avoid further distraction” to the work of party leader Humza Yousaf.

The 71-year-old was questioned by detectives yesterday as part of their probe into claims that £660,000 raised by the SNP to fight another independence referendum has been mis-spent.

He was released last night without charge, pending further investigations.

Beattie’s arrest came just two weeks after Peter Murrell, the SNP’ former chief executive and the husband of Nicola Sturgeon, was also taken into custody by Police Scotland.

He was also released without charge after being questioned for 11 hours.

In a statement, Beattie said: “This afternoon, I informed the party leader that I will be stepping back from my role as SNP national treasurer with immediate effect.

“I have also informed the SNP chief whip at Holyrood that I will be stepping back from my role on the Public Audit Committee until the police investigation has concluded.

“On a personal level, this decision has not been easy, but it is the right decision to avoid further distraction to the important work being led by Humza Yousaf to improve the SNP’s governance and transparency.

“I will continue to co-operate fully with Police Scotland’s inquiries and it would be inappropriate for me to comment any further on a live case.”

Beattie was originally SNP treasurer between 2004 and 2020 before being replaced by Douglas Chapman MP.

He returned to the role in 2021 after Chapman resigned, claiming he “had not received the support or financial information required” to carry out his duties.

As well as being leader, Yousaf is now the SNP’s interim treasurer until a full-time replacement can be found.

It was reported at the weekend that Beattie had told a meeting of the SNP’s national executive council that he was “having difficulty balancing the books” after the party lost 30,000 members and several big-money donors.

However, the party has insisted that it is not running out of cash.

The police investigation, called Operation Branchform, was launched following allegations that the £660,000, which was meant to be in a ring-fenced fund, had been misappropriated. The party has denied any wrongdoing.

It emerged in December that Murrell – who was chief executive for more than 20 years – had loaned the SNP £107,620 to help with “cash flow”.

The party has been engulfed in turmoil ever since Sturgeon’s surprise resignation in February.

Share Button

Dominion Settles Defamation Suit With Fox News

Dominion Voting Systems reached a settlement with Fox News on Tuesday in its massive defamation suit against the media giant, the same day the blockbuster trial was expected to begin.

“Without you, the parties would not have been able to resolve their situation,” Delaware Supreme Court Judge Eric M Davis told the jury of 12 people, who were sworn in earlier in the day.

Terms of the settlement were not immediately available, but the decision means Fox will avoid a potentially embarrassing trial and protect Fox Corporation Chair Rupert Murdoch and top Fox News hosts from testifying. The deal will also inoculate the network from legal repercussions linked to the spread of misinformation during and after the 2020 presidential election – at least for now.

The defamation trial had been set to begin Monday but was suddenly delayed on Sunday night, prompting reports Fox News had sought a last-minute settlement. Dominion had previously insisted the company would settle only if Fox issued an apology and admitted to spreading lies on the air.

The settlement protects Fox Corp chair Rupert Murdoch (above) and others at the network from having to testify.
The settlement protects Fox Corp chair Rupert Murdoch (above) and others at the network from having to testify.

Mary Altaffer/File via Associated Press

Dominion sued the network for $1.6 billion in damages, claiming Fox News intentionally peddled lies about the 2020 race, including that the company’s voting machines were rigged. Media advocates had expected the landmark case to delve into the spread of misinformation and the intricacies of American libel law, questions that have grown exponentially in recent years.

Fox had argued its actions were protected under the First Amendment and that its hosts had an “absolute right to cover the news”. But a deluge of bombshells appeared in court filings in recent months, demonstrating how senior executives at the network expressed doubt about Donald Trump’s claims of election fraud. In one deposition, Murdoch himself said under oath that several hosts “endorsed” false conspiracy theories, but he moved to distance their comments from the network itself.

Fox faces a separate defamation suit from Smartmatic USA Corp. The voting machine company has sued for $2.7 billion over similar claims to those of Dominion.

Share Button

Fox News On Trial: The $1.6bn Defamation Lawsuit Explained

A major defamation lawsuit against Fox News has begun – and much is at stake.

Dominion Voting Systems, a voting machine company, has brought a $1.6 billion (£1.29 billion) defamation case against the right-wing network in a trial over the broadcaster’s alleged role in spreading the lie of a stolen 2020 presidential election.

As well as the threat to Fox of eye-watering damages, the six-week trial has potential to pull back the curtain on former US president Donald Trump’s flse claims and how the right-wing TV network operates.

Sworn testimony is expected from Fox’s billionaire founder, Rupert Murdoch, and on-air talent, including Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity.

What is the case?

Denver-based Dominion claims New York-based Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp, essentially destroyed the voting company’s business and subjected employees to threats by falsely implicating it in a bogus conspiracy to rig the election against Trump.

Dominion says its lawyers sent Fox employees more than 3,600 emails attempting to correct Fox’s reporting on the issue. The company identified 20 specific statements from Fox broadcasts between November 8, 2020, and January 26, 2021, that it says were legally defamatory.

Fox contends that it was reporting newsworthy charges made by supporters of the Republican then-president and is supported legally by libel standards. After a one-day delay that raised the possibility of a last-minute settlement between the litigants, seating of the jury in Delaware took place on Tuesday, with opening statements expected to follow.

What do we know already?

Court documents have already been unsealed by Delaware superior court judge Eric M Davis, and the cache has illuminated the inner workings of the conservative network like never before.

It shows prominent figures at Fox didn’t believe the fraud allegations. Yet in public, Dominion argues, Fox News amplified the conspiracy theories and invited guests such as Trump ally Sydney Powell on air to allege Dominion’s voting systems had switched votes from Trump to Joe Biden, the Democrat who beat Trump to the White House.

Multiple staffers texted and emailed in disbelief as Trump latched onto increasingly tenuous claims of being robbed by voter fraud.

Hannity said in a deposition that he did not believe the fraud claims “for one second” but wanted to give accusers the chance to produce evidence. Hosts Carlson, Hannity and Laura Ingraham mocked Powell for spreading the claims. “This Dominion shit is going to give me a fucking aneurysm,” one Fox producer wrote in a message. “MIND BLOWINGLY NUTS,” wrote Fox Corporation SVP Raj Shah, per court documents.

Murdoch, questioned under oath, agreed the 2020 election was free and fair: “The election was not stolen,” he said.

In one email, Murdoch called Trump’s rhetoric “bullshit and damaging”. After Trump aide Rudy Giuliani gave a disastrous press conference on the conspiracy claims, Murdoch commented: “Really crazy stuff”.

Why did Fox adopt its position?

The court papers have laid out a profound concern at Fox over the impact of its election night call that Biden had beaten Trump in the battleground state of Arizona.

Calling Arizona for Biden was an unpleasant shock to supporters of Trump, including many Fox viewers. Not only were they facing losing the White House, but the news had been delivered to them by a source they could usually expect to advocate for their cause.

<img class="img-sized__img landscape" loading="lazy" alt="Tucker Carlson, left, and former US president Donald Trump in 2022.” width=”720″ height=”480″ src=”https://www.wellnessmaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/fox-news-on-trial-the-1-6bn-defamation-lawsuit-explained-3.jpg”>
Tucker Carlson, left, and former US president Donald Trump in 2022.

via Associated Press

Fox got the scoop on the call, but Trump and many Fox viewers began tuning in to rival conservative media outlets such as Newsmax.

Emails and memos released in the case show Fox executives were highly aware of a drop-off in their network’s viewership at the same time that Newsmax was gaining viewers, and the executives viewed that dynamic as a potential threat.

Carlson noted with irritation that the company’s stock price was down. Fox News Network CEO Suzanne Scott wrote in an email to Murdoch about the need to “keep the audience who loves and trusts us”.

What is Fox’s defence?

While Dominion’s case may seem strong, the US Constitution and Supreme Court precedent makes it difficult to prove defamation by a news outlet. Dominion will need to prove “actual malice”, meaning that Fox either knew what it was airing was wrong or acted in reckless disregard for the truth.

Fox says Dominion can’t prove its case, but some First Amendment advocates suggest the voting machine company has a strong argument. Their worry is that a prolonged legal battle would give the Supreme Court a chance to change libel laws that would weaken protection for all the media.

<img class="img-sized__img landscape" loading="lazy" alt="Rupert Murdoch in 2019.” width=”720″ height=”480″ src=”https://www.wellnessmaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/fox-news-on-trial-the-1-6bn-defamation-lawsuit-explained-4.jpg”>
Rupert Murdoch in 2019.

via Associated Press

“Dominion’s lawsuit is a political crusade in search of a financial windfall, but the real cost would be cherished First Amendment rights,” Fox said in a statement to HuffPost. “While Dominion has pushed irrelevant and misleading information to generate headlines, Fox News remains steadfast in protecting the rights of a free press, given a verdict for Dominion and its private equity owners would have grave consequences for the entire journalism profession.”

Was there any evidence of election fraud?

Federal and state election officials, exhaustive reviews in multiple battleground states where Trump challenged his loss, and Trump’s attorney general found no widespread fraud that could have changed the outcome of the 2020 election. Nor did they uncover any credible evidence that the vote was tainted. Trump’s allegations of fraud also have been roundly rejected by dozens of courts, including by judges he appointed.

Share Button

Why Has Vladimir Kara-Murza Been Jailed?

Russia has imposed a 25-year-sentence on a prominent political activist, underlining intensifying intolerance for criticism of the war in Ukraine and other dissenting opinions.

Under president Vladimir Putin, Russia for years has been cracking down on those who challenge the Kremlin. On Monday, Vladimir Kara-Murza was convicted of treason by a Moscow court and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Who is he?

Kara-Murza, 41, is a historian, journalist and opposition politician who holds Russian and British passports and studied in the UK at Cambridge University. He was a close associate of Boris Nemtsov, a leading opposition figure who was assassinated near the Kremlin in 2015, and continued to speak out against Putin despite the mounting risks.

Twice, in 2015 and 2017, Kara-Murza suddenly fell ill in what he said were poisonings by the Russian security services, on both occasions falling into a coma before eventually recovering. Russian authorities denied involvement in the incidents. Kara-Murza’s lawyers say that as a result, he suffers from a serious nerve disorder called polyneuropathy.

Kara-Murza was one of a small number of opposition politicians who remained active in Russia after it invaded Ukraine in February 2022 and publicly condemned the war in defiance of new censorship laws.

What was he accused of?

Kara-Murza was arrested in April 2022, hours after CNN broadcast an interview in which he said Russia was being run by a “regime of murderers”.

He was declared a “foreign agent” and accused of spreading false information about the actions of the Russian military in Ukraine in connection with a speech he had given the previous month in the Arizona house of representatives, where he said Putin was “dropping cluster bombs on residential areas, mothers’ homes, hospitals, and schools”.

In July, he was additionally charged over his involvement with two foreign-based opposition forums that are labelled by the Russian state as “undesirable”. Finally, on October 6, he was charged with treason over public speeches he had made in Lisbon, Helsinki and Washington.

Prosecutors requested a 25-year jail term.

How did he respond to the charges?

Kara-Murza said he had done nothing wrong and compared the proceedings to Josef Stalin’s show trials of the 1930s.

In a statement at the end of his trial, Kara-Murza said he was jailed for “many years of struggle against Putin’s dictatorship”, his criticism of the war in Ukraine and his long efforts to champion Western sanctions against Russian officials involved in human rights abuses.

“I know that the day will come when the darkness engulfing our country will dissipate,” the father of three told the court in remarks that were posted on his Twitter account. “This day will come as inevitably as spring comes to replace even the frostiest winter.”

Kara-Murza reacted calmly as the judge read the verdict and sentence. His lawyer, Maria Eismont, later quoted him as telling her: “My self-esteem has risen: I realised that I have done everything right. Twenty-five years is the highest appraisal that I could get for doing what I did and what I believed in, as a citizen, a patriot and a politician.”

“A quarter of a century is an ‘A+’ for your courage, consistency and honesty in your years-long work. I am infinitely proud of you, my love, and I’m always by your side,” Kara-Murza’s wife, Evgenia, who lives in the US with their children, tweeted after the verdict.

What have others said?

Human rights organisations and Western governments denounced the verdict and demanded his release. Amnesty International declared the 41-year-old to be a prisoner of conscience as it denounced “yet another chilling example of the systematic repression of civil society, which has broadened and accelerated under the Kremlin since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year.”

“The so-called ‘crimes’ Vladimir Kara-Murza was tried for – speaking out against the invasion and advocacy on behalf of victims of human rights violations – are in fact acts of outstanding bravery,” Amnesty’s Russia director, Natalia Zviagina, said in a statement. “This verdict wrongly conflates human rights activism with ‘high treason’ and is reminiscent of Stalin-era repression.”

What else has Russia done?

Days after the invasion, Russia adopted a law criminalising spreading “false information” about its military. Authorities have used the law to stifle criticism of what the Kremlin calls its “special military operation.”

The sweeping campaign of repression is unprecedented since the Soviet era, effectively criminalising independent reporting on the conflict and any public criticism of the war.

Last month, a Russian court convicted a father over social media posts critical of the war and sentenced him to two years in prison. His 13-year-old daughter, who drew an anti-war sketch at school, was sent to an orphanage. Days later, Russia’s security service arrested Evan Gershkovich, an American reporter for The Wall Street Journal, on espionage charges.

With reporting from Reuters and AP.

Share Button

Tory Chairman Greg Hands Mocked After Claiming Public Services Are ‘In Great Shape’

Tory Party chairman Greg Hands has been savaged after claiming Britain’s public services are “in great shape”.

He made the extraordinary comments despite NHS waiting lists being at a record high and teachers, nurses, doctors and civil servants planning another wave of public sector strikes.

Shadow health secretary Wes Streeting said: “What planet is he on?”

Hands made his astonishing claim while being interviewed on LBC.

He said: “I think public services are getting better. “We’re seeing far more nurses, far more doctors – 38,000 more doctors in the NHS since the Conservatives took over, there’ll be 50,000 nurses by the end of next year.

“Teaching standards are getting better, I think public services are improving.”

Hands added: “We’re dealing with the strikes at the moment but overall our public services are in great shape.”

Presenter Andrew Castle responded: “I find it absolutely extraordinary that you’ve said that.
“I don’t feel that myself and I don’t think my listeners would either.

Responding to the comments, shadow health Secretary Wes Streeting said: “He’s living on a different planet, isn’t he?

“That’s not what people who use public services are experiencing.

“We’ve got objectively the worst crisis in the history of the NHS, school budgets are on their knees.”

In a separate interview on Sky News, Hands was asked why anyone would consider voting Conservative in next month’s local elections, given the state of the country.

Share Button

Greg Hands Roasted Over Rishi Sunak’s Broken Pledges

Tory chairman Greg Hands has been roasted over the lack of progress being made by the government on Rishi Sunak’s five promises to voters.

The prime minister has pledged to halve inflation, cut NHS waiting lists, grow the economy, reduce national debt and stop the small boats carrying asylum seekers across the Channel from France.

But it emerged last week that waiting lists have hit a record high, GDP flatlined in February, while inflation also went up that month.

Sunak has also refused to commit to stopping the small boat crossings by the time of the next election.

On the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Hands was skewered over the government’s poor record.

He said the government is “working very hard at delivering all of the five priorities”.

But Kuenssberg said: “What happened to the economy in February?”

The Tory chairman replied: “Well in February it wasn’t one of the better results, but in January it grew by 0.3%. We had the best growth in the G7 in 2021 and 2022.

“Overall with this Conservative government we’ve got a record to be proud of on growth.”

Kuenssberg replied: “And in February there was zero growth. Are you proud of that? Are you proud of zero growth in our economy?”

Hands said: “That is a monthly figure. If you look at the previous month, for example, it was plus 0.3.”

In a separate interview on Sky News this morning, Hands said the Tories were on course for disaster in next month’s local elections.

He said: “The independent expectations are that the Conservatives will lose more than a thousand seats and that Labour need to make big gains.”

Share Button

Tories Heading For Local Election Disaster, Says Party Chairman

Tory chairman Greg Hands has said his party is on course to lose more than 1,000 seats in next month’s local elections.

The surprising admission came as the Conservatives continue to trail well behind Labour in the opinion polls.

More than 8,000 seats and 230 councils in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are up for grabs on May 4.

The Tories currently hold 3,290 of them, with Labour on 2,062 and the Lib Dems on 1,205. Independents and others make up the remaining 1,600 seats.

Appearing on Sky News this morning, Hands said the Tories are heading for a bad night.

He said: “There’s a huge number of Conservative councillors up for re-election in a few weeks time. The Conservatives remain the largest party of local government.

“The independent expectations are that the Conservatives will lose more than a thousand seats and that Labour need to make big gains.

“That is what the expectation is out there, but I’ve been up and down the country and the Conservatives are fighting really hard.”

That is a reference to a forecast by the elections experts Rallings and Thrasher, who said a 6% swing to Labour would see the Tories lose more than 1,000 seats and the opposition gain more than 700.

However, presenter Trevor Phillips accused Hands of trying to “massage expectations” so that if the Conservatives do better than expected, they can claim it as a triumph.

A Lib Dem source said: “This admission of defeat shows the Conservatives have already thrown in the towel before a single vote has been cast.

“This Conservative government has crashed the economy, plunged the NHS into the crisis and allowed filthy sewage to be pumped into our rivers.

“Rishi Sunak is facing a Blue Wall bloodbath as people who voted Conservative all their life say never again, and turn to the Liberal Democrats instead.”

HuffPost UK revealed last month that Shabana Mahmood, Labour’s elections co-ordinator, had warned the shadow cabinet that the opinion polls had “tightened” in recent weeks.

One Labour source said: “People probably have their expectations in the wrong places. They expect this to be a complete bloodbath for the Tories, with Labour hoovering up hundreds of seats.

“But the key thing to look out for is where Labour is winning and what our vote share is compared to the 2019 general election.”

Share Button

Russia Launches Crackdown On Draft Dodgers As It Prepares For ‘Lengthy’ War In Ukraine, UK Says

Russia is making it harder for its citizens to avoid being called up to the army as it prepares for a “lengthy conflict” in Ukraine, according to UK officials.

A new law has been passed to establish “a unified registry of individuals eligible for military service”, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) said.

In their latest intelligence update on the war, the MoD said: “The key implication of the measure is that in future, the authorities will be able to serve call-up papers electronically, rather than by letter, removing one obstacle which has previously allowed some to dodge the draft.

“With individuals’ call-up data now digitally linked to other state-provided online services, it is likely that the authorities will punish draft-dodgers by automatically limiting employment rights and restricting foreign travel.”

The MoD said the new measures are “highly likely part of a longer-term approach to provide personnel as Russia anticipates a lengthy conflict in Ukraine”.

Earlier this week, the MoD said Russia may inadvertently expose the real extent of its losses in Ukraine by honouring those who fell in World War 2 next month.

Some regions bordering Ukraine, and the occupied peninsula of Crimea, have reportedly called off events marking Victory Day on May 6 off due to security concerns.

However, the traditional parades are still going to take place further inland, posing a “sensitive communications challenge for the Kremlin”.

Vladimir Putin has positioned the war in Ukraine “in the spirit of the Soviet experience in World War 2″.

The MoD said: “The message risks sitting increasingly uneasily with the many Russians who have immediate insights into the mismanaged and failing campaign in Ukraine.

“Honouring the fallen of previous generations could easily blur into exposing the scope of the recent losses, which the Kremlin attempts to cover up.”

Share Button