Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Sunak branded ‘inaction man’ at PMQs as Starmer attacks record on schools, prisons and China – as it happened

Lords Pollution Michael Gove Sir Keir Starmer Angela Rayner ​​Rishi Sunak European Union

Afternoon summary

  • Ministers are at risk of having their plans to promote more housebuilding overturned in a vote in the House of Lords later this evening. They have already lost three votes on the levelling up and regeneration bill (see 1.42pm and 3.44pm) and peers are now debating the proposal to relax legacy EU anti-pollution rules (known as nutrient neutrality). No 10 claims the construction of 100,000 homes will be blocked if Labour and its allies overturn the plans in the Lords. (See 3.44pm.) Lord Deben (John Gummer), the former Tory cabinet minister and former chair of the Climate Change Committee, has just delivered a blistering attack on the government’s proposal in the Lords within the last few minutes. He said he did not regard himself as a rebel on this issue, because he thought it was the government that was not being conservative. He went on:

First of all, it is asking local authorities - and I can hardly believe it – to disregard the facts. This is the kind of attitude that you see in the Republican party in the United States; the people who don’t believe in climate change, that people who anti-vaxxers, don’t look at the facts.

Deben said he did not believe government claims that getting rid of the EU rule would lead to more homes being built. “The housebuilders are not building the houses they’ve already got planning permissions for in areas which are not in any way affected by this,” he said. And he said he objected to the government proposal that housebuilders should not have to pay for the pollution they caused. He went on:

I thought the Conservative party was in favour of the polluter pays. Now I just want to say to the minister, were she canvassing in the Mid Bedfordshire byelection at this moment, does she turn to an elector and say, ‘In future housebuilders building in the Wye Valley will not have to contribute for the cost and the damage they do, but you will through your taxes.’ So the Mid Bedfordshire voter in the byelection is now going to be asked to subsidise the housebuilders, because that is what these amendments are about.

Deben also said the government’s handling of this showed that it misled parliament when it said the Office for Environmental Protection would provide sufficient environmental safeguards for the public as the UK left the EU, and European law no longer applied. That was not true, he said. He went on:

We were assured that Glenys Stacey [chair of the OEP] and her department were going to be treated with all the respect which one would have expected. And we were told that she would have all the powers that were necessary for the government actually to take her seriously.

And what have they done [about the nutrient neutrality plan]? Two pathetic letters, and no statement …

It does mean that the British people are now less protected from government mistakes than any country in the rest of Europe.

For procedural reasons, if it loses, the government cannot reinsert the plans into the bill when it returns to the Commons, and a defeat would be particularly embarrassing because Sunak claimed last month that his reforms were already in place.

Old EU ‘nutrient neutrality’ laws prevent thousands of homes from being built here in the UK.

Nutrients entering our rivers are a problem, but the contribution made by new homes is small - these laws only block families from building the homes they need.

So I’ve reformed them.

But this could be another example (like small boats, and the Rwanda policy) where the Tories believe that, if they can’t do what they want to, at least they may be able to claim some electoral credit by blaming others for blocking them.

Lord Deben speaking in the Lords this afternoon.
Lord Deben speaking in the Lords this afternoon. Photograph: House of Lords

Updated

Tobias Ellwood has resigned as chair of the defence committee, ahead of a vote of confidence that was due on Thursday afternoon (see 3.51pm), Christopher Hope from GB News reports.

I understand from several MPs that Tobias Ellwood has now quit as chairman of Defence select committee. This is how @GBNEWS broke the story earlier today and on our website. One source told me: “He has told the committee he has resigned. He is going to write to the speaker.”

Updated

Left to right: Chris Heaton-Harris, the Northern Ireland secretary, the Princess Royal and trade secretary Kemi Badenoch at the Northern Ireland Investment Summit in Belfast today.
Left to right: Chris Heaton-Harris, the Northern Ireland secretary, the Princess Royal and trade secretary Kemi Badenoch at the Northern Ireland Investment Summit in Belfast today. Photograph: Liam McBurney/PA

Minister tells peers new nature recovery programme will more than compensate for impact of axing river pollution rule

In the House of Lords peers are now debating the nutrient neutrality amendments. (See 9.25am.)

Lady Scott, a levelling up minister, is leading for the government and in her speech she said that nutrients entering rivers posed “a real and serious problem” but she said the contribution made by new homes was “very small compared with that from sources such as industry, agriculture, and our existing housing stock”.

She said that, under the current rules, new development was being stalled at the point of planning permission in some areas and that this was “an absurd situation”. She went on:

It is undermining local economies, costing jobs, threatening to put small developers out of business and above all leaving communities without the homes that they want and they need.

This is not to say the problem of nutrient pollution in our rivers is not important. It very much is. But developers and local planning authorities are bound up in a burdensome and expensive process that does nothing to give certainty to anyone, creating huge opportunity cost.

Scott said the current habitat protections were “focusing huge effort on a very small part of the problem”.

That was why, along with the amendments to get rid of the nutrient neutrality rule, the government was setting out “an ambitious plan for nature recovery”, she said. She said these measures would more than compensate for the nutrients expected from the new housing developments that would go ahead. She went on:

Natural England’s own judgment is that this is sufficient funding to compensate for any additional nutrient flows from up to 100,000 homes between now and 2030.

Lady Scott
Lady Scott Photograph: House of Lords

Michael Gove’s local council warns of bankruptcy risk after failed Tory investments

Michael Gove’s local council is warning it faces effective bankruptcy within two years after racking up millions of pounds in debt for failed property investments overseen by its former Conservative administration, Richard Partington reports.

Shaun Spiers, the executive director of Green Alliance UK, has criticised No 10 for saying that 100,000 homes are at risk if its plan to get rid of the nutrient neutrality river pollution rules are rejected by peers. (See 3.44pm.)

Last month the Green Alliance published an article explaining why it opposed the government’s plan. It said:

Maybe the government believes it has set a trap for the Labour party: vote against us and you are voting against much needed new housing. Labour should stand firm. Changes to the current rules are necessary – no one is denying that – but what the government is proposing is badly thought through and there are strong reasons to doubt that it will result in more homes being built overall. Labour claims to be the party of cleaner rivers, a party that gets the scale of the environmental crisis. This is a test of its seriousness.

The government may be hoping that the immediate backlash to its proposals will die down. But that seems unlikely as, for many, the breaking of a hitherto intact pledge to maintain environmental protections will be a last straw.

Updated

Robert Colvile, who runs the Centre for Policy Studies, a Tory thinktank, has posted an epic thread on X/Twitter explaining why he approves of what the government is doing on nutrient neutrality (there is version of his argument in article form here on CapX) and why he thinks the Labour alternative (see 10.08am) won’t work. It starts here.

One of the most common accusations about the Tories’ proposed nutrient neutrality reforms is that they represent a handout to housebuilders. Unfortunately, Labour seem to be proposing to replace that with a handout to landowners. Quick thread. (1/?)

It’s worth reading the whole thing (if you’re interested in the policy), but these are some of the points Colvile makes about the Labour plan.

Rayner and Reed are actually right that since nutrient neutrality has become A Thing, a mitigation market has emerged. The problem is that it’s desperately clunky.

At the moment, housebuilders will pay approx £6-9k per household to ‘mitigate’ the extra pollutants from new housing. That means buying a nutrient credit. This is generally spent to create a new woodland or wetland to offset the pollution.

Sounds simple. But there are many, many complications. First, £9k per house is a lot of money! Most people think builders making obscene profits. But it’s a big chunk of their margins.

So maybe that house doesn’t get built. Or maybe it means lower contributions to local infrastructure, or a smaller amount of affordable housing, to make the numbers add up. (Again, see the district councils’ statement)

Colvile raises other objections (do read the whole thread). And he concludes:

I am genuinely glad that Labour are promising to tackle this issue. But it seems like their plan effectively just maintains the status quo, including all the uncertainty and delay – meaning no more housebuilding in these areas any time soon.

And the fact that they are pretending that there is some perfect, painless form of triangulation that can miraculously keep everyone happy – and that the foolish government are foolish fools for not realising this – does not fill me with confidence

Updated

Tobias Ellwood braced for no confidence vote as chair of Commons defence committee tomorrow

Tobias Ellwood, the Conservative chair of the defence select committee, faces a vote of no confidence at a meeting tomorrow afternoon after comments praising the Taliban for improving safety in Afghanistan.

The chair faces an uphill battle, given that the motion was put forward by two Conservative and two Labour MPs, with six votes required to achieve a simple majority of the 11 strong cross-party committee, including Ellwood himself.

Conservative malcontents are Mark Francois, a former armed forces minister, and Richard Drax, while Labour supporters of the motion are Kevan Jones and Derek Twigg, all unhappy with comments made by Ellwood in July.

In a tweet and accompanying video, Ellwood described Afghanistan as a “country transformed” following a trip there. He also said that “security has vastly improved, corruption is down and the opium trade has all but disappeared.”

It provoked strong criticism, particularly from veterans, and Ellwood, a former army captain, was forced to apologise saying “my reflection of my visit could have been much better worded and have been taken out of context”.

But that has not been enough to allay critics, who will have their say on his fate at the private meeting on Thursday, expected at 2pm.

Updated

No 10 claims construction of 100,000 homes at risk if it loses vote in Lords on axing river pollution law

Peers will soon be resuming the debate on the levelling up and regeneration bill. (They stopped for lunch, and they are currently on ministerial questions.)

Shortly before lunch the government lost a third vote on the bill, when peers voted for an amendment to allow local authorities to set planning application fees aimed at ensuring the processing cost is covered and does not fall on council taxpayers. That was passed by 181 votes to 148 – majority 33, a change. (See 1.42pm for more on the two earlier defeats.)

At the post-PMQs lobby briefing No 10 raised the stakes by claiming that, if Labour and other peers vote down the nutrient neutrality changes later today (see 9.25am), they would be blocking the construction of 100,000 homes.

The PM’s press secretary told journalists:

I think you can see the kind of political games being played that even [Keir Starmer’s] former housing secretary [Lisa Nandy] referred to not taking decisions to build housing as cowardice, and even Labour council leaders have been writing to the government urging us to take these steps to ensure houses that have local consent are built in these areas.

Asked whether the government amendment could be reintroduced when the bill returned to the government if the vote was lost tonight, the press secretary said that was not possible (because it was introduced only when the bill was in the Lords). She went on:

So the stakes are quite high … the next few hours will determine 100,000 homes.

A reader asks:

Both Sunak and now Victoria Atkins claim that escapes from closed prisons are now ten times less than under the last Labour government. I can’t find any data on this by doing various online searches. Where does this claim come from?

Adam Bienkov from Byline Times has posted this chart on Twitter to put the claim by Rishi Sunak into perspective.

Scottish secretary says Westminster will not try to stop drug consumption room pilot in Glasgow

Earlier this week Dorothy Bain KC, the lord advocate (chief prosecutor) in Scotland said she would not prosecute drug users for possession if they were were using drugs in a drug consumption room. Glasgow city council wants to open one as a pilot, and her announcement has now opened the door for this to happen, possibly within weeks.

During Scottish questions in the Commons earlier Alister Jack, the Scottish secretary, said that, although the UK government did not approve of the pilot, it would not try to block it. He told MPs:

Drug consumption rooms are not the easy solution.

There is no safe way to take illegal drugs. They devastate lives, the ruin families, they damage communities and the UK government believes the police and the procurator fiscal service should fully enforce the law.

However, if the Scottish government and the lord advocate decide to proceed with a pilot on drugs consumption rooms, the UK government will not intervene.

Updated

Here is another Full Fact factcheck on a claim made by Rishi Sunak at PMQs.

At #PMQs, Rishi Sunak said wages are “rising at the fastest rate on record”. Nominal regular pay (pay excluding bonuses, not adjusted for inflation) in the three months to July 2023 rose 7.8% – the fastest rate since current records began in 2001. (1/2) https://buff.ly/3RiadJq

Nominal total pay (pay including bonuses, not adjusted for inflation) also saw a near-record increase. However, pay adjusted for inflation grew more slowly over the same period, with real total pay up 1.2%, and real regular pay up 0.6%. (2/2)

Updated

Jeremy Corbyn did not speak at PMQs, but his leadership of the Labour party did get a mention. (See 1.20pm.) Since then he has been using X (formerly Twitter) to highlight one glaring topic that should have come up but didn’t.

Not one mention of the catastrophic flooding in Libya at PMQs.

Where is the concern for the victims of fires in Europe or the droughts across Africa?

Where is the outrage at fossil fuel giants destroying our planet?

Where is the hope for future generations?

Wake up!

These are from Full Fact, the fact-checking organisation, on Rishi Sunak claiming at PMQs that there are 1.7 million fewer people in poverty now than in 2010. (See 12.04pm.)

At #PMQs, Rishi Sunak said there are “1.7 million fewer people in poverty today than 2010”. This is correct based on one measure of poverty, but others offer a different picture. (1/3)

This figure appears to be based on the number of people in absolute poverty after housing costs, which has fallen by 1.7 million since 2009-10. The number in relative poverty after housing costs, however, is up by 900,000 over the same period. (2/3) https://buff.ly/3r3Wsn7

We wrote more about the different ways of measuring poverty in this fact check about a different claim back in June. (3/3)

Updated

Sunak is 'a man of action' and his record proves it, No 10 says in response to Starmer's jibe

Downing Street has also hit back at Keir Starmer over his jibe about Rishi Sunak being “inaction man”. Asked to repond, the PM’s press secretary told journalists:

The PM’s a man of action. If you look at his record on stuff – the Windsor framework, the Aukus deal, Atlantic declaration, Horizon deal, long-term energy security package, toughest legislation ever on immigration.

[The Starmer comment] comes from someone today … who is literally doing something to play politics in Westminster with 100,000 new homes when he claims to be the leader of a party that wants to back the builders. So, he might want to get a mirror.

Updated

No 10 says Sunak 'committed to triple lock' - but ducks questions about whether it will be in Tory manifesto

At PMQs Rishi Sunak twice said that the government “introduced and remains committed to the triple lock” for pensions. That did not sound like the sort of thing a leader was saying if he was planning to drop it altogether in the manifesto, but he has not committed to going into the election promising to maintain it for the next parliament.

Asked about this at the post-PMQs lobby briefing, the PM’s press secretary told reporters:

The government is committed to the triple lock – you just got the PM’s words in the chamber.

You wouldn’t expect me to write the manifesto here, but you can take the PM’s words and judge us on our record on that.

We’ve taken 200,000 pensioners out of poverty, provided an additional £300 of cost-of-living support and, of course, inflation hits pensioners hard, so that’s why it’s so important to halve it as part of our priorities target.

Updated

Government loses first two votes in Lords debate on levelling up bill.

Ministers have already suffered two defeats in the House of Lords on the levelling up and regeneration bill, PA Media reports.

Peers voted for an amendment demanding planning authorities are barred from granting permission for homes to be built on functional floodplains or areas at high risk of inundation. This was passed by 177 votes to 146 – a majority 31.

And within the last few minutes the government lost another vote as peers voted for an amendment to require planning authorities in England to consult the secretary of state before granting planning permission for developments affecting ancient woodland. That was passed by 189 votes to 145 – majority 44.

The debate on the nutrient neutrality amendments is coming later.

Updated

Sunak branded 'inaction man' at PMQs as Starmer attacks his record on schools, prisons and China

Here is the PA Media story on PMQs.

Rishi Sunak has been branded “inaction man” by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, as the government grapples with crumbling schools, Chinese espionage, and a prisoner on the run.

Starmer urged the prime minister to call a general election, as he accused the government of failing to heed warnings which led to a series of crises for ministers over the last week.

But Sunak hit back, claiming the Labour leader cannot be trusted due to his “principles-free, conviction-free type of leadership”.

At PMQs Starmer told MPs: “Probation, prison, schools, China… yet again Inaction Man fails to heed the warning and then blames everyone else for the consequences.”

In recent weeks, Sunak’s government has had to deal with the escape of former solider Daniel Khalife from Wandsworth prison, crumbling concrete in school buildings, and reports of Chinese espionage in Westminster.

The prime minister became personally embroiled in the row about reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete [Raac] after suggestions that, when chancellor, he approved 50 schools to be rebuilt per year, rejecting an application for 200 to be given the same treatment.

Pressing Sunak, Starmer said: “On Sunday, the home secretary celebrated her first anniversary in post – that is if you overlook the six days she missed when she was deemed a national security risk. In that year, 40,000 people have crossed the Channel on a small boat, and the taxpayer is now spending £6m a day on hotel bills. He is failing to stop terrorists strolling out of prison, failing to guard Britain against hostile actors, he has completely failed to stop the boats. How can anyone trust him to protect the country?”

Sunak responded by accusing Labour of leading plans to block housing reforms in the government’s levelling up and regeneration bill, which is currently being considered in the House of Lords.

The PM said: “He talks about trust, he tried in this house to talk the talk on housebuilding, but at the first sign of a cheap political hit, what did he do? He has caved in. Rather than make the right long-term decisions for the country, he has taken the easy way out. It is typical of the principles-free, conviction-free type of leadership that he offers. Flip-flopping from being a builder to a blocker. The British people can’t trust a word he says.”

Calling for a general election, Starmer went on: “No one voted for this shambles. No one voted for him. So how much more damage do the British public have to put up with before he finally finds the stomach to give them a say?”

But Sunak responded: “We are getting on for the British public, just in the last week announcing a new landmark deal for British scientists, attracting £600m for new investment for our world-leading auto industry, and wages now rising at the fastest rate on record. Where has he been this week? Locked away with Labour’s union paymasters, promising to give them more power and scrap the laws that protect British families and their access to public services. It is clear it is only the Conservatives that are on the side of the hardworking British public.”

Updated

PMQs – snap verdict

That was a difficult PMQs for Rishi Sunak. Quite how and why was illustrated by contributions from two people who weren’t even there, or at least did not speak.

The first was Jeremy Corbyn. It has been a while since Sunak has raised Corbyn (and Keir Starmer’s support for Corbyn) at PMQs, but we got the full spiel today in response to question 4. When Corbyn was actually Labour leader, denouncing him as a pacifist, anti-Nato Russophile was a line that worked rather well for the Tories. But it has never been particularly effective as a critique of Starmer (the public aren’t daft – they know that MPs have to support their party leaders in public, even if they don’t agree with them), it works less and less as time goes on, and today, as Sunak pushed the Corbyn button, it came across as indicative of desperation. He was doing this because it was the only attack line he had left.

This is a sign of how, on a whole range of security issues – defence, foreign policy, policing, crime, even small boats to an extent – Labour under Starmer has closed down all or most of its vulnerabilities. Interestingly (perhaps by chance, but more probably as part of a coordinated effort) two Labour backbenchers asked questions criticising the government for being insufficiently supportive of the military. They sounded like Tories haranguing a Labour PM.

The other ghost at the banquet was George Osborne. Much of PMQs at the moment consists of Sunak trying and failing to defend things happening in the public services as a result of Osborne’s austerity regime – most of which was implemented before Sunak even became an MP. Sunak might have been in a stronger position to see off some of this if he had had a bold reset moment when be became PM, disowning the Tory public spending record, but he didn’t, and now it’s too late.

Predictably, Sunak cited the Labour nutrient neutrality decision (see 9.25am) as evidence of Starmer being inconsistent. He said:

[Starmer] talks about trust, he tried in this house to talk the talk on housebuilding, but at the first sign of a cheap political hit, what did he do? He has caved in. Rather than make the right long-term decisions for the country he has taken the easy way out. It is typical of the principles-free, conviction-free type of leadership that he offers. Flip-flopping from being a builder to a blocker. The British people can’t trust a word he says.

But he got off to a poor start with evasive answers on Wandsworth prison and China, and overall his performance was underpowered and reductive. Because of the state of politics, Starmer always arrives at PMQs these days with a much stronger hand of cards, and he had the best line of the session, telling Sunak:

Probation, prison, schools, China, yet again inaction man fails to heed the warning and then blames everyone else for the consequences.

Updated

Richard Graham (Con) asks about government work promoting democratic values abroad.

Sunak says a white paper on international development is coming, and it will cover promoting democracy.

That’s the end of PMQs.

Lilian Greenwood (Lab) asks why the government is going ahead with cuts to the army.

Sunak says the government has put record sums into the armed forces. It is for the armed forces to decide how they spend the money, he says.

Updated

Brendan Clarke-Smith (Con) asks about the closure of Wilko stores. It has been mismanaged for years, he says. Recenty £77m has been paid out to shareholders. Will the government do all it can to support those affected by the closures?

Sunak says some of these are commercial matters. The government stands ready to support those affected.

Philip Davies (Con) says the government should ensure that any prisoner who assaults a prison officer cannot be released early.

Sunak says people who assault prison officers should face full consequences of their actions.

Florence Eshalomi (Lab) asks if there is Raac in military buildings. Can the PM guarantee the safety of people in the armed forces?

Sunak says people are following guidance on this across the public sector. The government has invested record sums in defence, he says.

Emma Hardy (Lab) asks when the government will take energy security seriously and protect the UK from fossil fuel autocrats.

Sunak says he does take this seriously. He says that is why he set up a new department to deal with this. Labour would make the UK more dependent on autocrats because it would stop new drilling in the North Sea, he says.

Updated

Michael Fabricant (Con) asks about road closures in his Lichfield constituency, caused by work on HS2. HS2 “is the most dysfunctional organisation I have ever had to deal with”, he says. He says HS2 should stop at the end of phase 1.

Sunak says he understands the disruption HS2 is causing.

Derek Twigg (Lab) asks if Sunak is ashamed that people are dying needlessly on his watch.

Sunak says the pandemic has made it harder to deal with waiting lists. But strikes have not helped. He says Labour has been supporting the strikers. And Labour is opposed to the government plan to limit the impact of strikes in public services.

Stephen Hammond (Con) asks about dementia, and recent progress on a new diagnostic test. Will the government convene a dementia taskforce to look at developments in this area?

Sunak says the government wants patients to benefit from new developments. He lists some government initiatives in this area.

Kate Hollern (Lab) asks about a headteacher in her Blackburn constituency who needs help because his schools Raac survey was incomplete. Will the DfE investigate this?

Sunak says he is sorry to hear about the disruption. Schools are being rapidly inspected, he says.

Daisy Cooper (Lib Dem) says her St Albans constituents will be affected by the expansion of Luton airport. Is it true that the government will ignore calls to block new airports?

Sunak says that story was not true. But it is true that he does not think the route to net zero should involve stopping people doing things they want, he says.

Sunak says AI can transform the way services are delivered, but we need guardrails. He says he looks forward to the upcoming AI summit.

Ashley Dalton (Lab) asks if the government remains committed to the triple lock.

Sunak says the government is committed to it. He says Dalton should speak to Angela Rayner, who did not sound committed. And, on pensions, we all remember Labour 75p per week increase, he says.

Chris Green (Con) say his local custody suite is always full because the police are catching criminals. He praises Greater Manchester police for this.

Sunak says he is pleased about the improvements in Manchester policing. They are a model for police forces across the country, he says.

Updated

Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, says last year 22,000 people waited more than four months to start treatment for cancer. The cancer waiting time target has not been met since 2015. Waiting reduces the chance of survival. When will the target be met?

Sunak says the government wants to speed up diagnosis. The pandemic held this up. There are hundreds more oncologists working compared with last year. And more early diagnostic centres are opening. The 62-day backlog is falling, he says.

Updated

Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, says Rishi Sunak spends more money heating his swimming his pool than the value of the state pension. Will the Tories maintain the triple lock?

Sunak says the Tories introduced it, and have increased it. And they have cut the number of pensioners in poverty. They have always stood up for pensioners.

Flynn says he did not hear a yes. There is a consensus between the Tories and Labour, he says. Who will scrap the triple lock first, the Tories or Labour?

Sunak says the government remains committed to the triple lock. Pensions in Scotland can rely on it because of the triple lock.

Starmer says Sunak was not elected. When will he give people a vote?

Sunak says Starmer has been “locked away with Labour’s union paymasters” this week. Only the Tories are on the side of the public, he claims.

Starmer calls Sunak “inaction man”. He says Suella Braverman has been in post for a year (if you ignore the few days she missed after she resigned). But she has not stopped the boats.

Sunak says the government is taking action to build more homes. Starmer tried to talk the talk on housing. But the first sign of a “cheap political hit”, he changed his stance. He goes on:

It is typical of the principles-free, conviction-free type of leadership that he offers – flip-flopping from being a builder to blocker.

Updated

Government has no clear strategy towards China, says Starmer

Starmer says that was not a yes. And he says the intelligence and security committee says the government has no clear strategy towards China. Will he commit to a full audit of UK-China relations that MPs have demanded?

Sunak says the ISC report related to 2019-20. Since then the government has put in place a new China strategy, he says.

If Starmer wants to talk about foreign policy, he should remember he was 100% behind Jeremy Corbyn, who wanted to scrap the army and withdraw from Nato. Starmer put his career first.

Updated

Foreign secretary raised spy allegations with China, Sunak says

Starmer turns to the Chinese spy story. He says Sunak was evasive on Monday when asked if the foreign secretary raised the spying case on his trip to China.

Sunak claims he said very clearly the foreign secretary raised “these issues” with the Chinese.

He says he has put in place the most robust policy ever towards China. What would Labour do differently?

Updated

Starmer says the Tories are “presiding over mayhem in the criminal justice system”. The chief inspector of prisons says conditions in Wandsworth are so bad it should be closed. This keeps happening – probation, school buildings and prisons. Why does the PM keep ignoring warnings until it is too late?

Sunak says Starmer should know that prisoners like this are not always held in category A jails. He says prison staffing levels are going up. And under Labour escapes were much higher, he says.

Updated

Keir Starmer pays tribute to the police who caught the escaped terror suspect who got out of Wandworth jail. Why wasn’t he in a category A prison?

Sunak says escapes like his are extremely rare. Two inquires are under way, he says.

Updated

Chris Law (SNP) asks Sunak if he agrees that no billionaire should qualify for special tax treatment, including the wife of the most powerful person in the country (ie, Sunak’s wife).

Sunak claims there are 1.7 million fewer people in poverty now than in 2010. Record support is available for poor people, he says.

(Presumably he is referring to the absolute poverty figure. But this is benchmarked to income levels for 2010-11. It is not the Tories who have reduced absolute poverty, but inflation.)

Updated

Rishi Sunak starts by paying tribute to the clerk of the Commons, John Benger, who is retiring.

From the Mirror’s John Stevens

PMQs celeb watch: Charlie Brooker and Konnie Huq in the gallery as guests of Rupa Huq

Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question at PMQs.

PMQs
PMQs Photograph: HoC

Rishi Sunak leaving Downing Street ahead of PMQs.
Rishi Sunak leaving Downing Street ahead of PMQs. Photograph: Kin Cheung/AP

Rishi Sunak to face PMQs amid backlash over reports triple lock for pensions may be watered down next year

Yesterday it emerged that ministers are mulling over a plan to tweak the triple lock for pensions so that what might be a bumper 8.5% increase in its value next year ends up being marginally less generous, at 7.8%.

As Pippa Crerar and Larry Elliott report in their story, ministers would justify the move on the grounds that under the triple lock pensions should rise in line with earnings next year but that the official figure for earnings inflation (8.5%) has been artificially inflated by one-off pay settlements in the public sector.

There is precedent for a one-off suspension of the normal triple lock uprating formula, which says pensions should rise in line with price inflation, earnings inflation or by 2.5% – whichever is higher. (For 2024-25, it is almost certain the earnings figure will be highest.) After Covid the government decided to ignore earnings for a year because the post-Covid bounce back in earnings created an anomaly.

But if the briefing yesterday as a kite-flying exercise – an attempt by No 10 to gauge quite how unpopular a policy would be, were they to implement it – then the kite came close to being shot down.

Two of the main rightwing papers splashed on the story. The Daily Mail focused on comments suggesting the that Conservatives may drop their commitment to the triple lock in the long term, but it also quoted campaigners attacking the proposal to tweak the rules for 2024-25. The Daily Express focused mainly on what it described as a possible “sneaky” change to the rules.

The Sun and the Daily Telegraph also both carried stories saying the triple lock increase for next year might be watered down, with quotes from people critical of the idea. But they did not publish editorials on the topic.

Rishi Sunak is taking PMQs soon. This topic may come up although, with Labour’s Angela Rayner refusing yesterday to say Labour would keep the triple lock after the general election, it may not be a topic for Keir Starmer.

Updated

In the House of Lords peers are just starting the latest debate on the levelling up and regeneration bill. But the vote or votes on the nutrient neutrality issue (see 9.25am) are not due until early this evening.

Theresa May: social housing tenants viewed by some Tories as ‘second-class citizens’

Social housing tenants were viewed by some in the Conservative party as “second-class citizens”, Theresa May has said, reflecting on the Grenfell Tower fire. Aletha Adu has the story here.

Mick Lynch, general secretary of the RMT rail union, has told MPs that it is “nonsense” to claim that the closure of rail ticket offices will lead to staff being redeployed on platforms.

Giving evidence to the Commons transport committee about the closure proposals, he said:

[The rail companies] are not taking them out of the ticket office to work on the platforms. They’re taking them out of the ticket office to make cuts, to cut the jobs out of the system.

It’s just a nonsense that these people will all be redeployed. They’re cutting the hours, cutting the deployment.

For people who need to travel, which is often off-peak, that will be the very hours that staff will not be there.

They will put people there chiefly in the peak hours, when it suits the companies, not when it suits many pensioners and others that come out after the early-morning rush.

Lynch also claimed that the consultation on the ticket office closures was “a sham”.

Updated

Labour can’t tax and spend its way out of trouble, warns Blair

Keir Starmer’s Labour must accept it will not be able to tax and spend its way out of financial trouble, Tony Blair has warned. Tom Ambrose has the story here.

Jenny Jones, the Green party peer, has been tweeting about the vote in the Lords on nutrient neutrality later.

I know the House of Lords has a bad reputation with lots of people, but there are times when we can highlight the worst excesses of the Govt and even occasionally block them. The votes today will be crucial for stopping more water pollution, but also for halting a big power grab.

How Labour says it would stop nutrient neutrality rules blocking housebuilding

Angela Rayner and Steve Reed have set out Labour’s alternative approach to the nutrient neutrality issue in a joint article for the Times. Here are the main points.

  • Rayner, the deputy leader and shadow levelling up secretary, and Reed, the shadow environment secretary, accept that the nutrient neutrality rules are causing problems for housebuilders. They say:

It is not in dispute that nutrient neutrality rules are making it challenging to secure consent for new housing development. The status quo is clearly not an option.

  • But they argue that the Tories are wrong to weaken environmental laws as a solution. “We must build the homes people need while also protecting the environment we live in. The two are not mutually exclusive,” they say. Echoing a line used by Keir Starmer to criticise the government’s approach across a range of policy areas, they accuse the Tories of adopting a sticking plaster approach to this problem. They say:

Like always this is the Tory solution, a quick sticking plaster here, no sense of what the impact is on the future. We do not accept this, and nor do we believe people want to see further harm caused to precious waterways the Conservatives have already flooded with raw, untreated sewage.

  • They say the government plan (getting rid of nutrient neutrality rules for developers, while boosting spending on the nutrient mitigation scheme) would “fatally undermine the emerging market in nutrient pollution reduction that developers are already making use of”.

  • They propose an alternative, compromise approach – allowing developments held up by nutrient neutrality restrictions to go ahead, on condition that mitigations are in place by the time the homes are occupied. They explain:

We know there are far better ways to build the new homes we desperately need than green-lighting water pollution. To give just one example, the government could direct local authorities to approve planning applications held up by nutrient neutrality rules, subject to so-called Grampian conditions.

This would allow developers to start building homes that are stuck in the planning pipeline but would require them to put in place measures to counteract any environmental harm before those homes are occupied. Such an approach would allow time for Natural England’s nutrient mitigation scheme or other off-site mitigation schemes to bed in, while also providing certainty to the housebuilding industry that the wait would not be indefinite.

These Grampian conditions could lapse after a certain period of time, they say.

We fully appreciate the concern among housebuilders about the need for an adequate supply of mitigation credits to make it work. It is indeed a failure on the part of the government that more has not been done to identify and bring forward sufficient suitable sites to enable the credit market to flourish.

To ensure that enough mitigation schemes are available, the government would need to provide Natural England and local authorities with support to identify suitable sites and bring more credits to market.

Updated

Ministers risk Lords defeat over plan to help housebuilders by axing river pollution law

Good morning. Politics is about choices, and yesterday, after equivocating for a fortnight, the Labour party made a choice. It has decided to vote against Michael Gove’s plan to get rid of a legacy river pollution law (nutrient neutrality, in the jargon) in the hope that this will lead to thousands more homes being built.

Ministers are now at risk of losing when peers vote on the issue later today. Defeat is not inevitable – the Conservatives have more peers than Labour and the Liberal Democrats combined – but crossbenchers have the swing votes in debates like this, and the Lords has consistently voted for measures to protect the environmental protections that came with membership of the EU.

If the Gove proposals are defeated in the vote on the levelling up and regeneration bill, the government will not be able to reinsert them when the bill returns to the Commons because the relevant amendment was only introduced when the bill was in the Lords.

Here is Helena Horton’s overnight story about the move.

Angela Rayner, the deputy Labour leader and shadow levelling up secretary, and Steve Reed, the shadow environment secretary, announced the move in an article for the Times in which they accuse the government of “conjuring up a false narrative that pitches housebuilding against protecting our natural environment”.

The danger for Keir Starmer is that, having worked hard to present Labour as being on the side of “the builders, not the blockers”, this will allow the Tories to say the opposite. We’ve got PMQs today and it would be surprising if Rishi Sunak does not spend his time accusing Labour of blocking development (because of this) and encouraging strikes (because of what Rayner told the TUC yesterday).

In truth, both parties are being a bit cakeist on nutrient neutrality; they both want more housing, and cleaner rivers. As the government announced when it set out its plans, it thinks it can offset the impact of getting rid of the nutrient neutrality rule with other measures to tackle river pollution. Labour also says “the status quo is clearly not an option”, and it has its own plan to stop nutrient neutrality holding up housebuilding (involving what are called “Grampian conditions” – more on this shortly).

But public debate is often shaped by headlines, not nuance, and Labour wants to cast the Tories as the party of river pollution.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9am: Mick Lynch, general secretary of the RMT union, and other rail industry figures give evidence to the Commons transport committee about accessibility and the proposed ticket office closures.

9.45am: Jonathan Brearley, chief executive of Ofgem, gives evidence to the Commons energy committee about preparing for winter.

11am: Peers debate the levelling up and regeneration bill. It is the seventh day of the report stage debate, and at some point (the debate will continue in the afternoon) there will be a vote on the government’s proposal to get rid of EU-era nutrient neutrality regulations – rules to prevent river pollution, which ministers say are holding back housebuilding.

11am: Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, gives evidence to the Lords communications committee.

12pm: Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.

Afternoon: Starmer is travelling to The Hague for a meeting with Europol about how Labour would deal with small boats.

Also, at some point today, Steve Barclay, the health secretary, is hosting a roundtable at No 10 on NHS preparations for winter.

If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a laptop or a desktop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line, privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate), or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Nicolas Cage is reprising his role as Spider-Man Noir, this time in a live-action series adapted by Prime Video
The Spider-Verse star's Spidey senses were tingling...
Total Film
Total Film
Taylor Swift has filed a trademark for 'Female Rage The Musical' - here's what it means
She has dozens of trademarks already
Marie Claire
Marie Claire
Taylor Swift files trademark for 'Female Rage: The Musical' as Eras Tour continues
The phrase harks back to a line the singer used during her show in Paris last week
Evening Standard
Evening Standard
The Witcher star says she's relieved the show is ending after season 5
Freya Allan admits she initially found the thought of doing two more seasons of the hit Netflix show "a challenge"
Total Film
Total Film
Inside the rise and fall of Ashley Madison: ‘People literally lost their lives’
A new Netflix docuseries explores how the site that enabled married people to have affairs devolved into chaos back in 2015
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
Should Baby Reindeer’s creator have written about his alleged stalker? I did the same thing – and it helped me heal
In my novel, I approached the subject with caution. It allowed me to feel pity for the person who made my life hell, says the writer Paul Burston
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play