Rishi Sunak – latest: Tory civil war deepens as Goldsmith hits back over claim he refused to apologise
Tory peer hits out at Sunak government’s ‘apathy’ – day after Downing Street faced down calls to fire him
Your support helps us to tell the story
This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.
The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.
Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.
The Tory civil war has grown more fractious as Zac Goldsmith hit out at “misleading” No 10 briefing over his scathing resignation, insisting that Rishi Sunak was “wrong” to claim he had refused to apologise over his Partygate comments.
The outgoing environment minister claimed he was “happy to apologise” for remarks labelled “disturbing” by the privileges committee in their report alleging “interference” from 10 Tories during their investigation which found that Boris Johnson repeatedly lied to parliament.
As he sought to get back on the front foot at a No 10 briefing outlining his plans for NHS reforms, Mr Sunak insisted the Tory peer had resigned after taking a “different course” when asked to apologise for his “incompatible” remarks – despite No 10 insisting just hours earlier that he had the PM’s confidence.
But Lord Goldsmith opened up a new front of criticism for Mr Sunak as he countered the PM’s claims of his refusal to apologise on Friday, insisting the Sunak government’s “lethargy” on climate meant his resignation had been a “long time coming”.
The best weapon the Tories have to throw at Labour? A pair of Starmer-branded flip flops
Hancock says government was more concerned with counting bodybags than stopping Covid spread
Boris Johnson’s Daily Mail job was ‘clear breach’ of government rules
Who is Charlotte Owen and why is she getting a peerage?
Sunak quizzed over lack of new funds for NHS wages
Rishi Sunak has defended the lack of funds in his new plan towards wages.
Probed by ITV about the fact that his announcement pledges money for training but not for NHS wages, with low pay a factor driving some out of the workforce, Mr Sunak said: “Would everyone like to be paid more? Of course they would be.
“But I think everyone also recognises the economic context that we’re in. Our job in government is to balance all those things, make sure that we reward people fairly and well for the incredible work they’re doing, particularly our NHS workers, but also make sure we’re doing things that are good for them and the rest of the country in the long-term and that means bringing down inflation.
“Because it won’t help anybody if we take the easy course and ultimately make things worse,” he said, adding that he was “really pleased” the NHS staff council had voted to accept the government’s recent pay offer, adding: “I’m very grateful to all of them for doing that.”
Watch: Sunak claims his government has invested more in NHS than any other
‘Everything we are doing is geared towards patients,’ says NHS chief
Asked whether people will notice any difference in the delivery of NHS care within the next 12 months, with levels of satisfaction at an all-time low, NHS England chief executive Amanda Pritchard said: “Everything we are doing is of course geared towards making things better for patients.
Discussing the things that will make a difference immediately, Ms Pritchard pointed to efforts at retention of staff, and reforms to training processes which will allow new roles to come onstream more quickly.
She added: “I think there is a lot in this plan that speaks to today, as well as the confidence it can give our current staff that we will get to a place where we have a sustainable staffing model in the longer term.”
Sunak says he ‘fundamentally disagrees’ with court’s Rwanda asylum deal verdict
Rishi Sunak has been asked by the Daily Mail about the Court of Appeal’s ruling against his Rwanda asylum plan yesterday and whether any flights carrying small boat migrants will take off this year.
The PM said: “I respect the court, but I fundamentally disagree with their conclusions.
“I strongly believe – and the Lord Chief Justice made clear that he agrees with us as well – that the Rwandans have provided all the assurances necessary to ensure that there is no real risk that asylum-seekers that are relocated under our policy would be wrongly returned to third countries.
“Rwanda is a safe country. The High Court agrees with that and ... the UNHCR, they use Rwanda for their own refugee scheme for Libyan refugees. Given all of that we’re going to seek permission to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court.”
He added: “The policy of this government is very simple – it is your government, and it is not criminal gangs who should decide who comes here.”
Sunak insists NHS doctors being lured to Australia ‘not widespread'
Asked about NHS doctors being lured to higher paid roles in Australia, Rishi Sunak said: “I read all those reports as well and I was concerned, the health secretary was concerned and we sat down and went through it all together, we went and looked through the data.
“And the data shows that it is not as widespread a practice as I think people assume it is. And clearly if it was, we would look to do something. That’s why with dentistry, which we’ve touched on before, where we think there is a potential issue there we are exploring ... the possibility of introducing a dental tie-in.
“But when it comes to doctors ... it was around 95 per cent of people who, after they completed their foundation training, were still working in the NHS. So I think the scale of what is happening is not at the level that people commonly assume it is.”
Goldsmith took ‘different course’ after remarks ‘incompatible’ with his position, says Sunak
Rishi Sunak said he accepted that Lord Goldsmith had taken a “different course” rather than apologise for his comments about the Commons partygate inquiry into Boris Johnson.
Speaking at his Downing Street press briefing about the NHS, the PM said: “On Lord Goldsmith, he was asked to apologise for his comments about the Privileges Committee because I felt they were incompatible with his position as a minister.
“He obviously has chosen to take a different course, I accept that. I’m proud of the record of this government and indeed Zac in government, making sure that we tackle climate change and protect our natural environment.
“The UK has played a leadership role globally and we will continue to do so, as you will see.”
His press conference has now concluded.
Johnson opposes Sunak in Covid inquiry WhatsApps clash
Boris Johnson has backed the UK Covid Inquiry in its High Court clash with his successor Rishi Sunak’s overnment over his unredacted WhatsApp messages, diaries and notebooks, report Sian Harrison and Jess Glass.
The Cabinet Office is bringing a judicial review of inquiry chair Baroness Heather Hallett’s order to release the documents, arguing it should not have to hand over material which is “unambiguously irrelevant”.
Lawyers for the department argue the inquiry does not have the legal power to force ministers to release documents and messages it says cover matters “unconnected to the government’s handling of Covid”.
At a hearing in London on Friday, Sir James Eadie KC, representing the department, said the challenge was “brought with some considerable reluctance”, but Lady Hallett’s demand was “so broad” it was “bound to catch” a large amount of irrelevant material.
Lady Hallett contends the Cabinet Office’s position “undermines” her ability to carry out the inquiry properly and would have “serious implications” for all public inquiries.
In written arguments put before the court on Mr Johnson’s behalf, his lawyers said he has “no objection” to the inquiry having the unredacted material, subject to “appropriate security and confidentiality arrangements” being in place – which he has been assured of by the inquiry.
Mr Johnson, who is an interested party in the case, along with his former adviser Henry Cook, is asking the court to reject the government’s challenge.
Watch: Sunak ‘fundamentally disagrees’ with Court of Appeal ruling that Rwanda policy is ‘unlawful’
SNP to meet accounts deadline with audit ‘qualification'
In other news, the SNP has said it is on course to meet its deadline to submit audited accounts, but they will contain a “qualification”.
The party appointed new auditors in May ahead of an Electoral Commission deadline on 7 July, when the party must submit its accounts or face a fine by the regulator.
Members of the SNP national executive committee (NEC) met on Thursday evening and approved the accounts, with the party saying today: “The audit contains one qualification relating to one stream of income due to administrative processes, resulting in a limitation in scope of the audit. There is no suggestion that the accounts do not present an accurate picture of the party’s financial position.”
This relates to missing documentation for “membership, donations and raffle income” for 2022 and 2021.
When auditors are fully confident in an organisation’s financial reporting their audit is said to be “unqualified”, if they have concerns about an area it is said to be “qualified”.
Sunak insists government is ‘entirely confident’ Rwanda plan is ‘right'
Speaking to reporters at his Downing Street briefing on the NHS, Rishi Sunak insisted that his government continues to “remain entirely confident” that its Rwanda policy is “right”, despite judges ruling it is unlawful.
“We are confident in our case. The High Court agreed with us, the Lord Chief Justice agreed with us,” Rishi Sunak told a Downing Street briefing.
“Rwanda doesn’t even have returns agreements with other countries and they have provided a set of safeguards and assurances to us about the treatment of refugees that will be sent there that we believe are strong.
“The High Court and Lord Chief Justice agreed with that, so we will seek permission to appeal this case to the Supreme Court and we remain entirely confident that what we’re doing is right.
“And it is also fair, because there is nothing moral or compassionate about allowing the current system to continue. People are needlessly dying as they try and make these crossings, they are exploited by criminal gangs.
“If you spend any time with the people, as I have done, who are in the Channel picking people up, seeing the conditions they are subject to, seeing what children are subject to, (you) would find it very hard to justify maintaining this system.”
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments