The joint owner of GB News has lost a legal battle with the South African government over £34m of silver secretly salvaged from a second world war shipwreck.
Sir Paul Marshall, who is lining up a bid for the Daily Telegraph, had claimed ownership of 2,364 silver bars his company had recovered from the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
This claim was successfully challenged in the UK supreme court by the South African government, which said it was the rightful owner of the silver as the metal had been bought for the South African mint.
The precious metal was sold by the government of India during the second world war, with the intention that it would be turned into coins for South Africa and Egypt. In late 1942 the 60 tonnes of silver was loaded on to the cargo ship SS Tilawa in Bombay (now Mumbai).
It set sail across the Indian Ocean for the port of Durban but was sunk by torpedoes fired from a Japanese submarine near Seychelles. In addition to the 280 people who lost their lives, the ship’s cargo, valued in 2020 at $43m (£34m), was lost to the sea.
There it remained for seven decades until the arrival of Argentum Exploration, a company majority owned by Marshall. The company, run by the former racing driver Ross Hyett, has taken advantage of improvements in technology to recover cargo from shipwrecks previously considered unsalvageable.
Argentum is among many businesses owned by Marshall, one of the UK’s most successful financiers, who uses his personal funds to finance media outlets including Unherd and GB News. The right-wing news channel made a loss of £42m last year – slightly more than the value of the salvaged silver – and announced redundancies.
The wreck of the SS Tilawa was found 2.5km under the sea and in 2017 Argentum spent six months secretly salvaging the silver, before sailing its booty to Southampton. The company unloaded the silver into a warehouse and declared it to the official Receiver of Wreck, believing it was legally owned by the UK government, only to be surprised when South Africa asserted ownership.
Argentum later argued that even if South Africa was the rightful owner, it should be paid for recovering the silver. Under maritime law, it is possible to claim a fee for voluntary salvage regardless of whether the owner of the property consented to the salvage operation.
But South Africa insisted it did not have to pay anything to Marshall, claiming the rules did not apply because the silver bars were being transported by a state for a non-commercial purpose.
On Wednesday, the UK supreme court sided with South Africa but noted that both sides had come to a confidential settlement late last month, before the judgment.
Jonathan Goulding, of the law firm HFW, who advised the South African government, said the ruling was significant: “In short, the court has firmly sent a message to those hoping to find and claim ownership of lost treasure that finders are not always keepers.”
The chair of the Garrick has told its members that the club may consider “allowing one or two exceptional … lady members” to join in the near future but that normal waiting times will apply for the majority of women.
Pro-women members have acknowledged that the club would need to find a way to expedite the general admission of women members to bypass the club’s complex and protracted admission process, which in normal circumstances can stretch over at least two years.
Some Garrick members are proposing to fast-track Joanna Lumley into the club, as an apology for the behaviour of several men a decade ago who scribbled over and tore up an earlier nomination submission made by fellow actor Hugh Bonneville.
In an email seen by the Guardian, Kirker confirmed that “usual waiting times will apply to all regardless of sex” but added “we may decide to consider one or two exceptional or even Distinguished lady members sooner”.
A list of seven members including the academic Mary Beard, former home secretary Amber Rudd, Channel 4 news anchor Cathy Newman and the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika was drawn up in advance of this week’s vote.
Some members have expressed fears that the current admission regulations would allow serving committee members to blackball some of the new female candidates who are likely to be nominated in the coming days.
Labour’s Harriet Harman, the Labour MP who drafted the Equality Act 2010, said the club’s admission process would need to change. “You can’t have men who excluded women for years choosing which women are ‘acceptable’ to them. They should invite the women candidates – Ayesha, Cathy and Mary – to form a panel for admissions.”
One member acknowledged that there would need to be radical change of the regulations to avoid “the awful prospect of just ending up with a few token women members.
“It will be embarrassing if in 12 months’ time the club just has six women members. But the current process means that it takes a couple of years before new members are elected. We can’t wait that long for women,” he said, asking not to be named.
Another member said the club’s administration appeared to have been taken aback by the decision to change the rules. “At the beginning of the year, most members of the general committee were of the view that women membership was at least five years away,” he said, also asking not to be identified.
There had been no discussion of how to admit women or whether their entry should be expedited or whether the club’s pink and green signature tie would be redesigned into an item of clothing that women might want to wear, he said. “There has, I am sure, been absolutely no thought given to any of those details.”
Another member said that the process of becoming a member could even take five to 10 years.
“You put a name down, you second it, and then the members sign their name on the book. And if you have a certain amount of signatures on the book, then they’re put forward to the general committee and people can blackball … but it normally takes five to 10 years.”
On the issue of expediency, in his email to members, Kirker said: “I have no doubt that we shall soon have female candidates in the book. Rest assured that the usual election process and waiting times will continue to apply to all regardless of their sex. We may decide to consider one or two exceptional or even Distinguished lady members sooner.”
Elsewhere in the email, Kirker revealed that about 200 members went back to the clubhouse after for a “most convivial supper”.
“I spoke with many members, the overwhelming number of whom either were delighted at the outcome or else prepared to accept the decision,” he wrote.
“I shall not deny that many believed that the road which the majority on the general committee had chosen was the wrong one to take.”
He added: “I should like to encourage all members now willingly to accept and welcome this change.”
Bonneville originally nominated Lumley in 2011 in an attempt to kickstart the club into changing its no women policy, but his attempt to put her forward for membership by writing her name in the leather-bound red candidates’ book was blocked by opponents.
Members now propose offering her an honorary membership, which could in theory be processed within days. They said this would atone for the treatment she received when the original nomination was thwarted by members scrawling comments such as: “who do they think they are?” and “women aren’t allowed here and never will be” on the page proposing her name.
The mood in the club in the wake of the vote was said to have been good humoured, with only a few people opposed to the admission of women expressing anger about the development.
“One man said: well of course we can just blackball any women. It wasn’t clear if it was a joke,” a member said. The television presenter Jeremy Paxman was blackballed by the club when he first sought to become a member, for reasons that remain unclear.
The current rules state that if four committee members vote against a new candidate, their nomination will be blocked.
Lambton, Lumley and the Garrick were all contacted for comment.
Labour has vowed it will change the law to ban fire and rehire, after a war of words with unions who accused the party of watering down its pledges on workers’ rights.
The plans are revealed in a new leaked dossier, which was sent to trade unions ahead of a crunch meeting with Keir Starmer and contains sweeping plans for an overhaul of workers’ rights including on employment status, protection against unfair dismissal and union representation.
But Unite accused the party of “betrayal” and said it was “unrecognisable” from the original proposals, citing a stark change in language on fire and rehire, zero-hours contracts and plans for legislation. A number of trade union sources said there would be “serious discussions” on the document at a meeting planned with Starmer on Tuesday.
The leaked document cautions that the overhaul will take time to implement, promising a “full and detailed consultation” on a plan to define a single status of “worker” in law, as well as a review of parental leave rights in the first year and saying time was needed to design and implement a fair pay agreement for adult social care.
Labour said the party was “strengthening the proposals to implement our commitments”. New commitments have been added to make sure unions will be able to easily gain recognition in insecure workplaces like Amazon warehouses, and the party pledges to change rules to make it easier to ballot on industrial action.
Key to the criticism from trade unions were changes to the wording of plans to end fire and rehire – removing a direct promise to end the dismissal of workers for rejecting a worse contract.
But Labour sources said it was not their intention to abandon that pledge and said the party would legislate within 100 days with an employment rights bill that would ban the practice.
Fire and rehire is the practice of making an employee redundant and then re-hiring them on worse terms and conditions, often as a way of forcing employees into agreeing to lower pay and bad terms.
In the leaked document, which sets out the latest version of the workers’ rights overhaul, Labour says it will “replace the inadequate statutory code brought in by the government with a strengthened code of practice and reform the law to provide effective remedies against abuse.”
But the document also said it is “important businesses can restructure to remain viable … when there is genuinely no alternative”. The original new deal document launched by Angela Rayner, the deputy leader, said Labour would be “adapting unfair dismissal and redundancy legislation to prevent workers being dismissed for failing to agree a worse contract”.
Labour has strongly denied it has changed its position. “Labour will legislate against fire and rehire and fire and replace through the employment rights bill that we table in parliament within 100 days of entering government,” a spokesperson said.
Unions are also expected to demand clarity on a ban of zero-hours contracts, described in the document as the “right to switch to a contract that reflects the number of hours they regularly work, based on a 12-week reference period”. The original green paper said: “Labour will ban zero-hours contracts and contracts without a minimum number of guaranteed hours.”
A party source said that employers would be required to proactively offer the new contract after 12 weeks. Unite, the Fire Brigades Union and other smaller unions have raised alarm that the loophole could be subject to abuse by rogue employers.
The document also suggests that new rights such as the “right to switch off” will come in the form of best practice models, in contrast to the original text that said “workers will have a new right to disconnect from work outside working hours”.
Proposed new rights against surveillance at home have also been subtly changed. Originally the party proposed to “introduce new rights to protect workers from remote surveillance”. The document now proposes that any plans be subject to consultation with unions.
Trade union sources said they would go through the document “line by line” with the Labour leader next week. Matt Wrack, the general secretary of the FBU, has previously said scaling back the plan would be “disastrous”.
On Wednesday, Unite’s general secretary, Sharon Graham, said the document received by trade unions outlining the final proposals was a “row back on a row back”, adding: “It is totally unrecognisable from the original proposals produced with the unions. Unrecognisable. Workers will see through this and mark this retreat after retreat as a betrayal.
“This new document is turning what was a real new deal for workers into a charter for bad bosses,” she said. “In truth this new document is not worthy of discussion. All unions must now demand that Labour changes course and puts the original new deal for workers back on the table.”
A Labour spokesperson said: “Labour’s new deal for working people is a core part of our mission to grow Britain’s economy and raise living standards across the country. A Labour government will need to hit the ground running and that is why we have been strengthening the proposals to implement our commitments.
“If elected we will bring forward legislation within 100 days of entering government”
The document commits to giving workers day one rights to sick pay and parental leave, as well as protection against unfair dismissal, introducing carers and bereavement leave, and changing minimum wage rules so it now reflects the average cost of living.
The document says the party will give all workers, including those in insecure work, the right to unionise and update trade union legislation to remove “unnecessary restrictions” and allow electronic balloting for strike action. It will also create a single enforcement watchdog and ease access to employment tribunals.
David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump.
He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest.
Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”.
Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans, including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington.
He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.”
Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said.
He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region.
Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher.
He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.”
Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well?
“I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.”
Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn.
He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.”
Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that.
“There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear.
He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang.
An American cryptocurrency entrepreneur locked in a legal dispute with the CEO of the collapsed crypto fund HyperVerse has been detained in Dubai and alleges police have tortured him into signing a false confession, the Guardian can reveal.
Edel Hsieh, 43, from California, was first arrested in March at Dubai’s airport while attempting to fly to London. Police beat him during his interrogation, he said.
“They torture us for our confession,” said Hsieh on a jail call recording obtained by the Guardian. “They said ‘I will rape you, hold you, and send you back to China.’ They slammed my head against the table, my arms were twisted and held up behind me.” When the police saw pictures of his wife on his phone, they threatened to rape her too, and the police also demanded money from him, he said on the call. The US consulate in Dubai said it could not help him.
“They used tools or something sharp to jam into my ribs,” said Hsieh. “They kept on punching.”
The entrepreneur suspects one of his other business partners besides Lee has retaliated against him by filing a suit alleging theft, according to his wife. She claims this legal complaint is the cause of Hsieh’s arrest and detainment. Financial disputes can be criminalized and result in arrest in Dubai.
Hsieh has been detained at Al Barsha jail in Dubai for the past two months. On 1 May, while still incarcerated, he was notified he would be charged with theft and “committing a felony”, his wife said, and he has signed a confession. His wife requested anonymity, as she fears backlash for speaking out about his detainment. She is currently living in another country in the Middle East and is scared of returning to the UAE, she said. A spokesperson for the United Arab Emirates did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“He has been wearing the same clothes since 5 March; the police do not allow them to receive clothes or see anyone from outside,” she said. She claimed Hsieh was suffering from a severe eye infection, had breathing difficulties due to allergies, and had not been granted access to medication.
Hsieh first moved to Dubai to develop Fomodex, a cryptocurrency exchange company that shut down in 2022, with Sam Lee and another partner in 2021, Hsieh’s wife said. After Hsieh raised objections to the way the business functioned, which he came to believe was fraudulent, he requested Lee refund his investment, his wife alleged. Lee provided Hsieh with cheques purportedly totaling $2.7m that then bounced, so Hsieh filed a case against him, but it was rejected by the court, according to emails from Hsieh’s lawyer.
In a statement, Lee denied that he and Hsieh had been business partners, writing: “I advised him on a few things.” When asked if had ever heard of Fomodex, Lee said: “Yes, provided some technology, nothing more.” Regarding Hsieh’s lawsuit, Lee wrote: “There is no dispute,” despite acknowledging that he knew of the suit and its allegations of cheque forgery. Lee has been charged in the US with operating a nearly $2bn Ponzi scheme for his alleged role in HyperVerse’s business. Lee denied any involvement in Hsieh’s arrest and expressed concern for his wellbeing, referring to him as an “old acquaintance” who “just disappeared”.
Lee confirmed the existence of the lawsuit and said it had resulted in travel restrictions being imposed against him by the Dubai authorities, preventing him from traveling without a guarantor.
Lee, who also lived in Dubai and said he maintained a “residence ID” there, was charged in the U.S. in January with conspiracy to commit fraud for his alleged role in HyperVerse, which American prosecutors have called a $1.89bn “pyramid and Ponzi scheme”. The UAE does not have an extradition treaty with the U.S.
Lee denied any responsibility of the HyperVerse scheme and called the US Department of Justice “an embarrassment” for charging him.
“[There is] no evidence whatsoever,” he said.
Lee’s indictment followed a Guardian Australia investigation that revealed details of the company’s operation, including using a fake chief executive officer to launch HyperVerse. Lee has promoted a new investment project since the charges were announced and recorded a video telling followers,: “It can only get better from here.”
The U.S. consulate in Dubai is aware of the situation and has stated in emails to Hsieh’s wife it cannot intervene on his behalf. According to correspondence reviewed by the Guardian, a representative has visited Hsieh in custody.
“The person from the consulate saw the marks and bruises on Ed’s body, but the police did not allow them to take photos,” Hsieh’s wife said.
When approached for comment, a spokesperson for the state department said: “We have no higher priority than the safety and security of US citizens overseas. When a US citizen is detained abroad, consular officers seek to aid him or her with all appropriate assistance.”
Hsieh’s wife is concerned her husband could be detained indefinitely.
“I just want him out,” she said. “I don’t want him to waste his life in there. We are planning to have a baby and are preparing to do IVF. This is ruining our lives. He’s a good guy and he has lost a lot of money to these scammers.”
Allegations of abuse and torture at the hands of Emirati police are common among foreigners who have been detained in the country. They include the British academic Matthew Hedges, who was arrested on spying charges and tortured in the UAE in 2018. He was subsequently pardoned. The British tourist Ali Issa Ahmad, who was detained for wearing a Qatar soccer shirt 2019, later launched legal action against Emirati officials he said tortured him.
The UAE has undergone a drive to become a global center for cryptocurrency businesses since 2022, when Dubai announced the launch of the Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority (Vara), the world’s first independent crypto regulator. Major crypto exchanges, such asBybit andCrypto.com, are among those that have established a hub in Dubai. The Binancefounder, Changpeng Zhao, also made his home there before he pleaded guilty to money laundering violations in the US and was sentenced for four months in prison in April.
French Olympic swimmer Florent Manaudou become the first Olympic torch carrier in France after the Olympic flame arrived to the southern French city of Marseille marking another milestone in the lead-up to the Summer Games in Paris.
A majestic three-mast ship carried the Olympic torch from Greece for the welcoming ceremony at sunset Wednesday in the city’s Old Port.
The ship docked on the pontoon that reflects an athletics track and Manaudou carried it to mainland France.
Fireworks go off as the Belem, the three-masted sailing ship bringing the Olympic flame from Greece, enters the Old Port in Marseille, southern France, Wednesday, May 8, 2024. After leaving Marseille, a vast relay route is undertaken before the torch odyssey ends on July 27 in Paris. The Paris 2024 Olympic Games will run from July 26 to Aug.11, 2024. (AP Photo/Laurent Cipriani) (AP)
The ship sailed into Marseille’s old port with the French national anthem, La Marseillaise, echoing from the embankment and a French Air force flyover with planes first drawing the five Olympic rings and then the red-blue-white colours of the nation’s flag.
Tens of thousands cheered the arrival at the cordoned-off stage area on the shore as thousands of others waved from balconies and windows overlooking the festivities.
The torch was lit in Greece last month before it was officially handed to France.
It left Athens aboard a ship named Belem, which was first used in 1896, and spent twelve days at sea.
President Emmanuel Macron met with the French Olympic athletes who have sailed on Belem with the Olympic torch upon his arrival to Marseille.
“With the arrival of the flame, the country enters the games,” Macron said at the city’s Olympic Marina.
The Patrouille de France aerobatics demonstration aircraft leave a tricolor trail of smoke in the sky. (AP)
Paris 2024 Olympics Organising Committee President Tony Estanguet said the return of the Olympic Games to France was cause for a “fantastic celebration.”
“As a former athlete, I know how important the start of a competition is. That is why we chose Marseille, because it’s definitely one of the cities most in love with sports,” added Estanguet, a former Olympic canoeing star with gold medals from the 2000, 2004 and 2012 Games.
Safety of visitors and residents has been a top priority for authorities in Marseille, France’s second largest city with nearly a million inhabitants.
About 8,000 police officers have been deployed around the harbor.
Thousands of firefighters and bomb disposal squads have been positioned around the city along with maritime police and anti-drone teams patrolling the city’s waters and its airspace.
From left to right, Tony Estanguet, President of Paris 2024, Benoit Payan, Mayor of Marseille, and Deputy Mayor of Marseille, Samia Ghali, speak to press in Marseille, southern France, Tuesday, May 7, 2024. The Olympic torch will finally enter France when it reaches the southern seaport of Marseille on Wednesday. (AP Photo/Daniel Cole) (AP)
“It’s a monumental day and we have been working hard for visitors and residents of Marseille to enjoy this historical moment,” said Yannick Ohanessian, the city’s deputy mayor.
The torch relay will start on Thursday in Marseille, before heading to Paris through iconic places across the country, from the world-famous Mont Saint-Michel to D-Day landing beaches in Normandy and the Versailles Palace.
Heavy police and military presence was seen patrolling Marseille’s city centre on Tuesday, as a military helicopter flew over the Old Port, where a range of barriers have been set up.
French Interior Ministry spokesperson Camille Chaize said officials were prepared for security threats including terrorism.
Actress Mary Mina lights a torch during the official ceremony of the flame lighting for the Paris Olympics, at the Ancient Olympia site, Greece on April 16, 2024. (AP)
“We’re employing various measures, notably the elite National Gendarmerie Intervention Group unit, which will be present in the torch relay from beginning to end,” she said.
The Olympic cauldron will be lit after the Games’ opening ceremony that will take place on the River Seine on July 26.
The cauldron will be lit at a location in Paris that is being kept top-secret until the day itself. Among reported options are such iconic spots as the Eiffel Tower and the Tuileries Gardens outside the Louvre Museum.
A couple from south Wales have admitted carrying out a string of “dine and dash” offences, racking up large bills for food and drink before leaving without paying.
Bernard McDonagh, 41, and Ann McDonagh, 39, from Port Talbot, admitted five joint charges of fraud and will be sentenced at Swansea crown court this month.
The pair dishonestly obtained food and drink for themselves and their family at four restaurants and one takeaway in south Wales with the unpaid bills totalling more than £1,000.
It began in August last year when they defrauded the River House on the waterfront in Swansea of £267 of food and drink.
The restaurant said that the couple, after running up a “very hefty bill”, promised to get money from a nearby cash point when their card was declined, but never returned.
Speaking after the case, a spokesperson for the restaurant said: “We are delighted to hear justice has, at last, caught up with the pair. We are grateful to the public who have not only been a huge help in tracking down these criminals, but also for their huge amount of support.”
The McDonaghs next targeted the Golden Fortune takeaway in Port Talbot, taking £99 of food and drink without paying in January.
The next month they enjoyed £277 of meals from La Casona restaurant in Skewen, which serves Spanish and Italian food, and in March ate £196 of food and drink from Isabella’s brasserie in Porthcawl, both without paying.
Their final offence took place on 19 April, when they ate £329 of food – including T-bone steaks and double dessert portions – then left without paying the bill at the newly opened Bella Ciao in Swansea.
In a post on Facebook at the time, Bella Ciao described how a woman tried to pay with a savings account card, which was declined twice. She then left but her relative stayed behind. He left soon after, following a phone call.
Bella Ciao said the family had given a fake number to reserve a table at the restaurant. “To do this to anyone is disgusting but to do this to a newly open restaurant is even worse,” they wrote.
Both defendants covered their faces as they arrived at Swansea magistrates court. Ann McDonagh also admitted four counts of shoplifting, including at a designer store, taking items worth £1,017.
Keir Starmer is facing shadow cabinet anger for welcoming into his party a rightwing Conservative MP who has repeatedly attacked Labour over migration.
Natalie Elphicke became on Wednesday the second Tory MP in two weeks to cross the floor of the Commons, dealing another major blow to Rishi Sunak.
Starmer welcomed Elphicke to the Labour party at prime minister’s questions and said the Conservatives were “failing to keep our borders safe and secure”.
Elphicke quit the Conservatives with a broadside against Sunak, saying that under his leadership the Tories had become “a byword for incompetence and division” and had abandoned the centre ground.
But Starmer’s decision to admit her to Labour has been met with bafflement and consternation from his MPs, including some in the shadow cabinet and on the frontbench. MPs and shadow cabinet sources expressed reservations about her past comments and conduct.
Labour sources said Starmer was met with a hostile response over the defection at a meeting of the party’s parliamentary committee. They said he was challenged about Elphicke’s values and whether a rightwinger with her record should be welcome in the Labour party.
One shadow cabinet minister said: “People are upset and angry right across the party about the decision.”
Another shadow minister said: “Logically or politically, we didn’t need this … I worry that they’ll not have done sufficient due diligence on her.”
They added: “Her hard-right views are a big red line too. Are we welcoming Nigel Farage next week?”
Welcoming Elphicke to the Labour party at PMQs, the Labour leader asked Sunak: “What is the point of this failed government staggering on … [when] the Tory MP for Dover, on the frontline of the small boats crisis, says the prime minister cannot be trusted with our borders?”
Conservative MPs were flabbergasted by Elphicke’s defection. She had been a member of the rightwing European Research Group of Tory MPs and a vocal proponent for tougher rightwing politics. One minister said her move marked the “new ERG wing of the Labour party”.
Critics pointed to Elphicke’s comments on migration and strident criticism of Labour’s policies. A year ago she wrote an article for the Daily Express calling Starmer “Sir Softie” and accusing Labour of wanting “open borders”. She wrote: “Not only have Labour got no plan of their own to tackle illegal immigration, they simply do not want to.”
In 2021 she clashed with the England footballer Marcus Rashford, who she said should have spent more time “perfecting his game and less time playing politics” – a reference to his campaign for free school meals – after he missed a penalty at the Euro 2020 final. She later apologised for the remarks.
One Labour MP said there was significant anger among some women in the party about the decision to admit Elphicke. “Most of us on the backbenches struggle to get any contact at all from the Labour leader or his team – perhaps if we were to stand in front of a few more flags or join the [European Research Group]?”
An MP on the left of the party added: “I think many in the party think it’s disgusting, that we don’t need people like that in the Labour party, and that she is absolutely vile … Who in their right mind thought this was helpful?”
A former shadow minister said: “Many of us didn’t fight Momentum only to see our leader welcome Reform in the front door.”
Another source of controversy is Elphicke’s record of defending her former husband, Charlie Elphicke, whom she succeeded as MP for Dover after he was suspended from the Conservative party over sexual assault allegations. He was found guilty two years later.
Shortly after his conviction, his ex-wife defended him in an interview with the Sun, saying he was “attractive, and attracted to, women” and that had made him “an easy target for dirty politics and false allegations”.
In the summer of 2021, she became one of several Tory MPs who were given suspensions from the Commons and told to apologise for being found to have tried to influence a judge presiding over his trial.
Starmer’s spokesperson defended the decision to admit her to the party. “It’s a sign of the progress that we’ve made that people recognise that on some of the key challenges facing the country, the Tories have failed,” he said.
“Here is someone who is willing to make the significant step of switching across to Keir Starmer’s changed Labour party and that’s something we’re very happy to see.”
A Labour source said Elphicke would not be fighting her seat at the next election, and had not been offered a job or a peerage, but could informally advise the party on housing policy. She is understood to have met Starmer once before crossing the floor.
Elphicke is the third former Conservative MP to defect to Labour during this parliament. On 27 April, the former health minister Dan Poulter joined Labour with a swipe at the government’s record on the NHS. In January 2022, during Boris Johnson’s leadership, the MP for Bury South, Christian Wakeford, defected citing the then prime minister’s “disgraceful” conduct.
Some things you just don’t see coming. Defections from the Tory party may be very on trend: just last month it was Dan Poulter. Or Dan Who? to his friends. But when Natalie Elphicke took her place right behind Keir Starmer on the Labour benches for prime minister’s questions there were open mouths on both sides of the Commons. Penny Mordaunt had to do a quick double-take. Could it be? Surely not. It was. She dashed to the speaker’s chair to warn the prime minister.
Elphicke is no ordinary defector. Not some Tory wet like Dripping Dan. So centre-right one nation that she may as well have been Labour anyway. Natalie is about as far to the right as you can get. Not only that, but with an unpleasant backstory too.
A woman who defended her husband, Charlie, the previous MP for Dover, until she inherited the constituency after he had been convicted of three charges of sexual assault. Not the best of looks. Natalie was even suspended from the Commons after she was found to have tried to influence the judge presiding over his trial.
Then there are her politics. Natalie was about the only MP to criticise Marcus Rashford for campaigning for free school meals. The only good kid is a hungry kid. Why couldn’t they just get a job and feed themselves? Footballers should know their place and stick to football. It goes to say that Natalie was also a paid-up member of the European Research Group. A diehard advocate of the hardest possible Brexit that would do the most damage to the UK.
She has never yet met a foreigner she didn’t want to deport. Every time a small boat lands in her constituency, she projectile vomits. Only last year she was writing about how Labour couldn’t be trusted not to get soft on refugees. Stay strong, Nat! And it goes without saying she has never got over the removal of Boris Johnson from No 10.
Quite how Natalie explains her defection to herself is a mystery. What does she tell her Dover constituents? Or even her friends? Assuming she still has any. Does she just say her career has always been a bit of a joke? Labour the unexpected punchline. Is she hoping for a safe seat at the next election? Or maybe even a peerage. Labour insist not. But things do change.
Understandably, then, many on the Labour benches looked a little queasy to find Elphicke in their ranks. At best they grinned and bore it. At worst they shuffled away to create a cordon sanitaire. There was certainly no rush to pick up their phones and tweet their excitement about their newest recruit. Most would have been more than happy for Nat to have been refused entry to the Labour party. A polite reminder that there were plenty of spare seats among the independents and the has-beens. Next to 30p Lee.
But Keir Starmer is made of sterner stuff. He keeps telling us that the Labour party has changed and he’s as good as his word. Even the undesirables are now welcome. Better a sinner that repenteth and all that. Anything that chips away at Tory morale is fine, as far as Keir is concerned. A quick win is quick win. Never mind the politics, feel that Tory majority getting chipped away.
At the current rate of attrition, Rishi will be running a minority government within a matter of weeks. And Elphicke’s welcome to the Labour camp shows that no one will be turned away. Jacob Rees-Mogg, Mark Francois and Bill Cash. Feeling betrayed by Brexit? Come and find a shoulder to cry on. Anyone thinking they may lose their seat in a few months, then jump ship. You can tell that Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove must be really tempted.
Rishi Sunak didn’t look that bothered to be told by Starmer that Elphicke was now an ex-Tory. Maybe the news had yet to really register. Rish! is good on denial. He has to be. Otherwise he wouldn’t be able to cope. Once he gives up, the Downing Street bunker will quickly empty. Cue, downfall memes. As it was, Sunak just ignored the whole thing. It hadn’t happened. Nothing had changed. Rish! is visibly falling apart. The man previously untouched by failure is now its embodiment.
PMQs now represents a Theatre of Cruelty, its every second a reminder of Sunak’s own inadequacy. It starts with the cheers that greet his arrival in the Commons. They’ve gone from the ironic to the openly mocking. No one thinks he is doing a good job. No one holds him in any affection. He only gets to keep his job because it would look even worse to sack him so soon before a general election. An election they all know they are going to lose. Gallows humour is all that is left. Dignity long gone.
Everyone knows the score. None more so than the Labour leader. Time was when Starmer was more wary around Rish!. Took him seriously as a political opponent. Now he is almost demob happy. The game of PMQs is just too easy for him. Sunak is just a plaything. A rag doll to be kicked around and punched. Before being discarded.
Starmer began by crowing about the local election results. Rish! looked as if he might start crying before starting to read out the names of all the successful Tory councillors. There are so few, it didn’t take long. Sunak retreated into his safe place: the investigation into Angela Rayner. Keir just smirked. People in glass houses, etc. Had the prime minister forgotten that he had two convictions himself?
After that it was all just fun, fun, fun. All the places where Sunak has fifth homes – the ones we know about – were now under Labour control. So at least he would be safe. Could Rish! think of any of his policies that were actually working? At the current rate of progress it would take 300 years to deport every refugee to Rwanda. Sunak’s comebacks just died a death. Not even his own backbenchers could keep up the pretence that they were enjoying this.
We ended with Sunak unexpectedly blurting out an inconvenient truth. “There is no long-term policy,” he said. Of course there isn’t. Everything is concentrated on short-term survival. The prime minister had been spat out and ground into the dust. You wouldn’t treat an animal like this.
Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary who stepped aside last week allowing John Swinney to stand unopposed for the Scottish National party leadership, has been appointed deputy first minister.
The announcement came after Swinney was sworn in as Scotland’s seventh first minister at the court of session on Wednesday morning, after his nomination by MSPs at Holyrood, where he pledged to be the “first minister for everyone in Scotland”.
Swinney had promised a “significant” role to Forbes, who narrowly lost to Humza Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest to replace Nicola Sturgeon.
After informal talks between the pair last week, after Yousaf’s resignation nine days ago, Forbes said she had been persuaded by Swinney’s promise to “govern from the mainstream” to rule herself out of the contest and back his bid.
John Swinney sworn in as Scotland’s first minister – video
Forbes was the only appointment of significance in a reshuffle in which nine cabinet secretaries kept their existing portfolios, prompting derision from Scottish Labour, who dismissed Swinney’s “continuity cabinet”.
The economy portfolio will be split off from Màiri McAllan’s brief and given to Forbes, a Gaelic speaker who also takes responsibility for the Gaelic language. McAllan, another younger woman who is considered a potential future SNP leader, remains in cabinet with responsibility for net zero and energy.
Forbes, who served in Sturgeon’s government before returning to the backbenches after Yousaf offered her what she considered a demotion, said it was “a moment of extraordinary privilege” to rejoin the cabinet.
Swinney described her as “an immensely talented politician”, saying her new role would be critical “as we focus on our key commitments of eradicating child poverty, investing in public services and supporting economic growth”.
Her appointment to such a senior position is a clear signal to those within the SNP who had expressed reservations about the party’s governing partnership with the Scottish Greens and its influence on policy areas including rural affairs, just transition, economic growth and LGBTQ+ reforms.
Since her narrow defeat by Yousaf, Forbes has become a focus for those worried that divisive and distracting rows, such as those about gender recognition reform and the implementation of the hate crime act, were giving the impression to voters that the party did not prioritise their cost of living concerns.
Yousaf abruptly ended the partnership two weeks ago, but was forced to step down when the Greens backed a vote of no confidence against him, leaving him unable to marshal sufficient cross-party support.
The Scottish Greens co-leader, Patrick Harvie, was critical of the appointment, saying Forbes had expressed “quite startlingly social conservative views” during the leadership campaign last March.
But Shona Robison, who stepped down as the deputy first minister immediately before being replaced by Forbes but remains responsible for finance and local government, said Forbes’s appointment was the best way to unite the party and deliver a “progressive agenda”.
In a letter to Swinney, Robison revealed she had made the suggestion during a conversation that took place last week, for which Swinney thanked her in his letter of acknowledgment.
Swinney wrote: “I thought hard about your offer because I recognise it as an act of selfless generosity. I agree with you that it will help me create the inclusive and unified team that is needed to take Scotland forward.”
