The ugly truth about Lucy Powell's grooming gangs comments

This week Lucy Powell, leader of the House of Commons, did something unusual for a politician: she spoke from the heart. Her dismissal of the rape gangs as a 'dog whistle' was no gaffe. It was not a 'blunder'. It was a brutally honest expression of the government's exasperation with this pesky scandal. It was savagely candid, pulling back the curtain on Labour's gross and haughty indifference to this outrage in which thousands of working-class girls suffered the most unspeakable abuse.
It was on Any Questions that Powell gave voice to her party's elitist vexation with all the public blather about rape gangs. Tim Montgomerie, the founder of Conservative Home who now aligns himself with Reform, asked her if she had watched Groomed: A National Scandal, the brilliant Channel 4 documentary about five women who endured horrific exploitation at the hands of these gangs.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Spectator

15 minutes ago

• Spectator

Reform can go further in its plan to woo back non-doms

We will hear plenty of familiar criticisms of the plan unveiled by Reform yesterday to bring non-doms, as wealthy foreigners who enjoy a special tax regime in the UK are known, back. It will make Britain a magnate for tax dodgers and money launderers. It will increase inequality. And the only jobs it creates will be as servants of the super-rich. In fact, however, the only problem with the Reform plan is that it doesn't go far enough. The party should be a lot more ambitious as it prepares for a potential government. It will certainly be a major change. After a decade over which all the political debate has been about how to impose higher taxes on the rich, Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform, will this week set out plans to bring them back. A new 'Britannia Card' will allow both foreigners and returning expats to pay a flat fee of £250,000, in return for which their worldwide income would be exempt from most UK taxes for 10 years. The money raised would then be distributed in the form of a 'Britannia worker's dividend' to low-paid employees, with a bonus worth an estimated £600 to £1,000 a year. Reform's plan has the potential to change the economic argument There are legitimate criticisms of the Reform plan. It may be complex to implement, and earmarking the income generated for a 'dividend', while politically clever, may prove too fiddly. The tax system needs simplification, not yet more complex allowances. And yet, it has the potential to change the economic argument. It is already clear that the Labour-Tory consensus on driving out the non-doms has been a disaster for the British economy, while the Starmer government's determination to put up taxes on the rich has led to an exodus of wealth and talent. Reform has recognised how damaging that has become, worked out that the UK needs to attract wealth, and recognised that the entrepreneurs and business owners who have left the UK need to be bought back. Indeed, extending the tax break to returning British nationals may well prove the most significant part of the package. But Reform could afford to go even further with their plan. The £250,000 flat fee may well need to come down if the UK is to compete with similar deals available in Italy and Greece or the zero taxes levied in Dubai and the Caribbean. A much lower annual threshold may well generate more revenue overall. And it should extend the offer to foreign entrepreneurs, with a far lower rate of Capital Gains Tax to start-ups who want to move from their high-tax bases in Paris, Stockholm or Madrid to a far more lightly taxed London, Cambridge or Bristol. The important point, however, is this. As the non-doms and the wealthy flee the Chancellor's Rachel Reeves's increasingly punitive tax regime, she will now have to defend her decisions against a very clear alternative. As the disaster of taxing success becomes clear, that will become harder and harder – and Reform's alternative will look a lot more attractive.

Rhyl Journal

2 hours ago

• Rhyl Journal

Denbighshire, Conwy, Gwynedd & Anglesey MPs back assisted dying bill

MPs voted 314 in favour, to 291 against, during the third reading of Labour's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) in Parliament on Friday (June 20). This does not mean the bill has become law, but it allows it to now progress to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. The majority almost halved since the last vote in November, during the bill's second reading. If successful, the bill would make assisted suicide legal for terminally ill adults expected to die within six months, and with the mental capacity to make a choice about how to end their life. Below are comments from MPs Llinos Medi, Liz Saville Roberts, Claire Hughes, Gill German and Becky Gittins on why they all backed the bill. Llinos Medi (Image: Submitted) "I am assured that the bill has been strengthened during the scrutiny process. For example, I voted in favour of an amendment to prevent health professionals such as doctors from initiating conversations with under-18s about assisted dying, which passed. "Regardless of today's vote, scrutiny does not end here. As MPs, we have a duty and I remain committed to listening to all voices, including those who oppose the bill. "Whatever your opinion on today's outcome, I believe that we should show respect to both sides of the debate. Days like today are not easy and we must show compassion to all." Liz Saville Roberts (Image: Submitted) "I believe that adults who are terminally ill, with a prognosis of six months or less to live, and who have full mental capacity, should have the legal right to make this profoundly personal decision for themselves, free from coercion and with strong safeguards in place. "I fully understand the concerns many people, including disability rights groups and medical organisations, have raised about protecting individuals. "That is why I support the inclusion of strict safeguards, involving medical professionals, social workers and judicial oversight, to ensure that each decision is carefully assessed, voluntary, and free from pressure. "I am also conscious of concerns about the so-called 'slippery slope'. However, the bill is tightly framed, applying only to terminally ill adults and excluding those whose suffering is solely related to mental illness. Any further changes would require full parliamentary scrutiny." Claire Hughes (Image: Submitted) "Fundamentally, I believe we should all have the right to decide what happens to our bodies and when enough is enough. "I believe that the status quo - where only terminally ill people with the wealth to enable them to travel to Dignitas are able to exercise control over their final moments - is not good enough. "This bill has gone through a robust process, making it rigorous, practical and safe, and is rooted in the principles of compassion, justice and human dignity. "I want, again, to make it abundantly clear that good palliative care and giving terminally ill people the choice to choose an assisted death, are not mutually exclusive." Gill German (Image: Rick Matthews) "During report stage, I supported New Clause 10, which expands the bill's protection for medical practitioners to ensure they have 'no obligation' to administer an assisted death and provide legal protections for medical professionals to ensure they are not subject to punishment for refusing to carry out an assisted death. "Further, I voted against New Clause 1 and 2. While I respect the deeply held views on all sides, I believe both amendments introduced unnecessary risks by restricting open, compassionate conversations between clinicians and patients that are often essential to end-of-life care. "New Clause 1, which was not adopted, would have banned doctors from raising assisted dying with adult patients at all, even when clinically appropriate. This clause would disproportionately harm those with lower health literacy who may not know how to start the conversation. "New Clause 2, which was passed, prevents doctors from discussing assisted dying with under-18s in any context. I believe this risks isolating terminally ill teenagers or young relatives of dying patients, by preventing doctors from discussing assisted dying with under-18s in any context. "This may drive vulnerable young people towards unregulated and potentially harmful sources of information." Becky Gittins (Image: Submitted) "I believe there are as many safeguards as practically possible contained within this bill to ensure free and fair choice for patients to make this decision in an informed way, free from coercion. "I hope that the high level of parliamentary scrutiny that this bill has received will encourage a more forensic consideration of the role of patient decision-making across the UK and broader society. "Throughout the legislative process, the attention given to the needs of the most vulnerable people and the importance of ensuring a free choice has brought an essential focus on the role of coercion, domestic abuse, disability, ableism and poverty on people's ability to genuinely make a free decision about their lives – whether on this issue or many others."

Daily Mirror

3 hours ago

• Daily Mirror

Nigel Farage slammed for plotting 'golden ticket for foreign billionaires'

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is planning to let wealthy business tycoons pay £250,000 for a so-called Britannia Card, which would excuse them from taxes on overseas earnings and inheritance tax Nigel Farage is accused of plotting a "golden ticket for foreign billionaires" to avoid paying a raft of UK taxes. The Reform leader is set to announce his plan to let wealthy tycoons from overseas get "non-dom" tax status if they pay a one-off fee of £250,000. But Labour numbercrunchers say this means less money will be raised for the Treasury, meaning Farage and co would have to raise more money elsewhere. ‌ Those who hand over the cash for a 'Britannia Card' will be shielded from paying UK tax on overseas earnings and avoid paying inheritance tax entirely. Mr Farage claims the money would be distributed among Britain's lowest paid workers. ‌ But a Labour spokesman hit back: ' Nigel Farage can brand this whatever he wants - the reality is his first proper policy is a golden ticket for foreign billionaires to avoid the tax they owe in this country. 'As ever with Reform, the devil is in the detail. This giveaway would reduce revenues raised from the rich that would have to be made up elsewhere - through tax hikes on working families or through Farage's promise to charge them to use the NHS.' Mr Farage will say in a speech on Monday that he plans to "'restore the social contract between rich and poor". A statement from his party says: 'We are serious about repairing the social contract. It's time workers feel the benefit of high-net-worth individuals entering the country. 'We are taking policy formulation very serious internally, as can be seen by today's announcement.' It is not the first time Labour has accused Reform of dodgy sums. Last week a Labour backbencher drew laughs across the Commons when he asked how the Government was helping improve maths standards for adults before mocking Mr Farage. The Reform leader looked sheepish as both AdamThompson and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner poked fun of him. Ms Rayner said it proved that Reform's sums "don't add up". ‌ Mr Farage came under fire after claiming to have unearthed £7billion of "wasteful" spending on diversity and equality programmes in Whitehall. But closer inspection showed the civil service actually spent £27million - 250 times less, the Commons heard. Backbencher Mr Thompson asked: "As a trained physics teacher and a former engineering lecturer, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister what this government is doing to help people improve their math skills after they've left school? "I came across an awful case the other day, a 61-year-old man who believes he counted up £7billion in government spending, but it was really only £27 million. ‌ "What can we do to people like the leader of Reform UK, who evidently can't add up." Mr Farage, 61, watched on as the exchange unfolded. Ms Rayner, who was stepping in for Keir Starmer as he was returning from the G7 summit in Canada, responded: "Mr Speaker, my friend highlights an important fact - Reform's sums simply don't add up. He'll be pleased to know that we're investing £136million for skills boot camps, and I will be sure to send the details to the honourable member for Clacton (Mr Farage)." At the end of last month, Reform said cutting DEI programmes would make the massive saving. A spokesman for the party told The Times that the figure came from a review of spending carried out by the Conservative Way Forward group.