Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Nadeem Badshah (now) and Andrew Sparrow (earlier)

Government loses all seven Lords votes on Rwanda bill – as it happened

​​Rishi Sunak PMQS Frank Hester Lee Anderson the 1922 Committee
A protest outside the supreme court in London against the government’s Rwanda plan in 2022.
A protest outside the supreme court in London against the government’s Rwanda plan in 2022. Photograph: Anadolu/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

A summary of today's developments

  • The government suffered seven defeats in the House of Lords on Wednesday over its contentious Rwanda bill. Peers voted in favour of amendments including to exempt people from deportation to Rwanda if they have assisted British troops and to exempt victims of modern slavery. The Lords also backed amendments for age assessments tests on unaccompanied children to be carried out by local authorities, applying the balance of probabilities burden of proof. Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, believes the government would bring the Rwanda Bill back next week to “get on with it” if it were ready to implement its deportation scheme. Cooper said: “The half a billion pound Rwanda scheme is a failing farce, which will only cover less than 1% of asylum arrivals.”

  • According to Katy Balls from the Spectator, Rishi Sunak told Tory MPs at the 1922 Committee: The PM said: “We are in the fight of our lives. This battle will define us, when the going got tough, when the polls were against us did we dig deep and fight or did we turn in on ourselves?”

  • The Department of Health and Social Care published its tobacco and vapes bill, the legislation that will very gradually ban smoking by ensuring that children turning 15 this year or younger will never legally be able to be sold tobacco.

  • Vaughan Gething used his first speech in the Senedd after being formally nominated as first minister of Wales to accuse the UK government of “unprecedented hostility” to devolution. He declared: “In recent years we have pushed the boundaries of what is possible with devolution. We did it, for example, to keep Wales safe [during Covid]. “But in that same period, we have seen unprecedented hostility towards democratic Welsh devolution from a UK government determined to undermine, frustrate and bypass the Welsh government and this Senedd. As well as leaving Wales with less say over less money, it is deeply corrosive, wasteful and undemocratic.”

Updated

Rishi Sunak’s flagship Rwanda deportation bill is expected to be put on hold until at least next month after the House of Lords inflicted seven defeats on Wednesday.

The safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, which aims to block Strasbourg from halting the removal of asylum seekers to east Africa, is not expected to return to the Commons until after the Easter break.

Any delay could make it increasingly difficult to fulfil the prime minister’s plan to see flights take off for Kigali by the spring.

The legislation is central to the Conservative government’s pledge to “stop the boats”. Ministers have claimed that the bill will deter people from travelling across the Channel.

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, believes the government would bring the Rwanda Bill back next week to “get on with it” if it were ready to implement its deportation scheme.

Commenting after peers inflicted a fresh defeat against the policy in the Lords, Cooper said: “The half a billion pound Rwanda scheme is a failing farce, which will only cover less than 1% of asylum arrivals.

“It is clearer than ever that Rishi Sunak knows this plan won’t work and only sees it as a political gimmick to get what the former immigration minister described as ‘symbolic flights off just before an election’.

“If the Conservatives were ready to implement this, they would be bringing the Bill back to complete the remaining stages next week and get on with it.

“But because their plans aren’t ready, they’ve decided to delay the Bill as well, so they can try to blame everyone else for the chaos they have created, and the fact that they haven’t got a proper plan.”

In an interview with the BBC’s Faisal Islam, the prime minister Rishi Sunak was asked for a timeframe on abolishing employers National Insurance.

Sunak said: “The first thing to explain is, you know, why have we been cutting national insurance? And it’s because like I said, I believe very much in hard work. And that’s why actually, it’s four years today that, you know, I created the furlough scheme or announced the furlough scheme.”

Sunak added: “Now, we have a situation at the moment, which isn’t fair, because if for someone in work, they pay tax twice, once in income tax and then once in national insurance. So there’s a double tax on work, which doesn’t apply to other forms of income. That’s not fair.

“But it’s also complicated unnecessarily, all that money goes into effectively the same pot to fund the same public services. So you know, ultimately our long term plan is to remove that double taxation on work because that will be a simpler, fairer tax system.”

When asked if it would abolished in one parliament, the PM said: “No, no, I think we need to stick to the plan. And we can make progress towards that goal in the next parliament.

“But what I’d say here is that judge me on my track record, we’re only going to do these things responsibly.”

After the Commons previously rejected the proposal to exempt people from deportation if they have assisted British troops, arguing that such people should come to the UK by safe and legal routes, Lord Browne added a caveat to his H1 amendment that they should give notice before arriving in the UK.

Government suffers seventh defeat in Lords on Rwanda bill

The contents voted 248 while the not-contents voted 209 so the Lords votes in favour of Amendment H1 to exempt people from deportation if they have assisted British troops.

Peers are now voting on a motion to approve the final amendment, H1.

H1, tabled by Des Browne, a Labour former defence secretary, would exempt people from deportation if they have assisted British troops.

Government suffers sixth defeat in Lords on Rwanda bill

The contents voted 251 while the not-contents voted 214 so the Lords votes in favour of G1 to exempt victims of modern slavery from deportation to Rwanda.

Peers are now voting on a motion to approve Amendment G1.

G1, tabled by Lady Butler-Sloss, would exempt victims of modern slavery from deportation to Rwanda.

Government suffers fifth defeat in Lords on Rwanda bill

The contents voted 249 while the not-contents voted 219 so amendment E1 is approved.

Peers are now voting on a motion to approve Amendment E1.

E1, tabled by Labour’s Ruth Lister, would say that age assessments tests on unaccompanied children should be carried out by local authorities, applying the balance of probabilities burden of proof.

A Labour peer who fled to Britain on the Kindertransport scheme said that sending children who have been wrongly assessed as adults to Rwanda would be “an appalling dereliction of our responsibilities to vulnerable young people”,

Lord Dubs said: “This House has consistently supported the rights of children in relation to asylum, these are the most vulnerable people in the whole of the asylum system.

“If a mistake is made the consequences will be out of all proportion to the damage if a mistake is made in the other direction.

“That is to say, to send a child wrongly assessed as being an adult to Rwanda would be an appalling dereliction of our responsibilities to vulnerable young people.”

Lord Coaker, the shadow home office minister, said the government has “got itself in a right mess” over the Bill.

He added the government is delaying its own legislation by delaying MPs voting on the Bill until after Easter rather than next Tuesday.

Aubrey Allegretti from the Times has more from Rishi Sunak’s meeting with the 1922 Committee.

It wasn’t all plain sailing for the PM

As @SamCoatesSky picked up on, Jake Berry challenged the PM over briefings against him over the weekend that the former party chair alleged came from No 10.

Berry said he was loyal and had not put in a letter of no confident but demanded…

That’s all from me for tonight. Nadeem Badshah is taking over now.

Sunak tells Tory MPs they face 'fight of our lives' and urges them not to turn on each other

According to Katy Balls from the Spectator, Rishi Sunak told Tory MPs at the 1922 Committee:

We are in the fight of our lives.

This battle will define us, when the going got tough, when the polls were against us did we dig deep and fight or did we turn in on ourselves?’

John Crace thinks he knows the answer.

Ken Clarke, the Tory former chancellor who has been a strong opponent of the Rwanda bill (despite originally supporting the Rwanda policy), is the only Conservative who has voted with the opposition tonight. He voted against the government on amendment B1 (see 5.45pm) and amendment B2 (see 6.02pm).

Peers are now debating three more amendments to the Rwanda bill.

One, E1, tabled by Labour’s Ruth Lister, would say that age assessments tests on unaccompanied children should be carried out by local authorities, applying the balance of probabilities burden of proof.

Another, G1, tabled by Lady Butler-Sloss, a former lord justice of appeal, would exempt victims of modern slavery from deportation to Rwanda.

And the third, H1, tabled by Des Browne, a Labour former defence secretary, would exempt people from deportation if they have assisted British troops.

The government is opposing all three amendments.

Government suffers fourth Rwanda bill defeat, with peers voting to say Rwanda can be ruled unsafe for some refugees

The government lost the fourth vote too, by 263 votes to 233 – a majority of 30.

This means amendment D1 passes, saying ministers or immigrations officials should have the power under the bill to say that Rwanda is not a safe country for a particular person, or group of people.

That is the smallest opposition majority tonight.

Updated

In the Lords peers are now voting on amendment D1 – an amendment tabled by Labour’s Shami Chakrabarti that would allow ministers or immigrations officials to say that Rwanda is not a safe country for a particular person, or group of people.

Government suffers third defeat in Lords on Rwanda bill

The government has lost the third Rwanda vote in the Lords. Amendment B2 (see 5.52pm) was passed by 276 votes to 226 – a majority of 50.

This says that it will be up to the independent monitoring committee to say when the Rwanda treaty has been implemented. Peers have already passed an amendment saying, until the treaty has been implemented, deportation flights cannot start.

Rishi Sunak seemed to make a reasonably good impression at the 1922 Committee, according to journalists who have been speaking to Tory MPs who heard him.

From the Times’ Aubrey Allegretti

Lots of frontbenchers have been positive about Sunak’s performance so far. But a backbencher says: “Pep talk fine. Rest very flat but will get him through to 2 May.”

Lots of Sunak loyalists asking questions.

“Everyone speaking said the minority causing trouble just need to shut the fuck up,” was one MP’s pithy explanation.

Liam Fox stood up and pointed out to colleagues that no Tory elected in 1997 went on to be PM. Ie that anyone thinking an electoral defeat soon would help their own personal leadership ambitions should be very careful.

Someone jokingly raised a point of order and Theresa May pointed out she was returned in 1997.

Cue gushing tributes from the PM to May…

From Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt

Very positive response from Tory MPs as they leave 1922 after Rishi Sunak appearance. “Brilliant”. “He pulled it round”

From Bloomberg’s Kitty Donaldson

Rishi Sunak told the 1922 Committee of backbench Tories that the “small number” of rebels in his party were making him “angry”

Sunak described as “fired up” by witnesses

In the Lords peers are now voting on amendment B2, a supplementary amendment to the one passed just now saying Rwanda will only be considered a safe country when the provisions of the Rwanda treaty have been implemented.

Amendment B2 says it will be up to the independent monitoring committee to say when the treaty has been implemented.

Government suffers second Rwanda bill defeat as peers vote to block deportations until treaty provisions implemented

The government has lost the second vote in the Lords on the Rwanda bill. By 285 to 230, a majority of 55, peers voted to say Rwanda will only be considered a safe country when the provisons of the Rwanda treaty have been implemented.

Updated

Here are some more tweets from journalists who have been doorstepping the 1922 Committee.

All agree, essentially, that it is hard to find any group of people as insincere as Tory MPs loudly expressing support for their leader.

From Peter Walker

From Kevin Schofield from Politics Home

From Aubrey Allegretti from the Times

From Adam Bienkov from Byline Times

In the Lords peers are now voting on Lord Hope’s amendment B1, which says Rwanda will be regarded as a safe country “when the arrangements provided for in the Rwanda treaty have been fully implemented and for as long as they to continue to be so”.

How government cut opposition majority for 'international law' amendment to Rwanda bill from 102 to 43

Here is the breakdown of the vote in favour of the first amendment. (See 4.55pm.)

For

Bishops: 4

Crossbenchers: 57

Labour: 128

Lib Dems: 71

Others: 11

Total: 271

Against

Conservatives: 204

Crossbenchers: 16

Others: 8

Total: 228

And, for comparison, here are the figures when the Lords voted on an earlier version of this amendment in early March.

For

Bishops: 4

Conservatives: 4

Crossbenchers: 62

Labour: 123

Lib Dems: 70

Others: 11

Total: 274

Against

Conservatives: 161

Crossbenchers: 5

Others: 6

Total: 172

Last time the government lost by a majority of 102. Today the government lost by a majority of 43. Broadly speaking, that means the government has rustled up 59 extra votes.

These figures show that the main changes today are a big increase in the number of Tory peers turning up to vote for the government (up from 161 to 204 – and increase of 43) and a significant increase in the number of crossbenchers voting with the government (up from 5 to 16 – and increase of 11).

There are also four Tory peers who were willing to vote for this amendment last time (Ken Clarke, John Gummer, Viscount Hailsham and Lord Tugendhat) who did not do so this afternoon.

Meanwhile, in another room in the Houses of Parliament, Rishi Sunak is addressing the Conservative 1922 Committee.

David Wilcock from MailOnline says Sunak received the traditional table-banging welcome.

In the House of Lords peers are now debating amendments saying the provisions in the Rwanda bill should only come into force when it has been established that Rwanda has complied with the terms of its treaty with the UK, which should reform the way it handles asylum cases.

Lord Hope of Craighead, a former deputy president of the supreme court, who has tabled these amendments, says he is not questioning the good faith of the Rwandan government.

He says he just wants to ensure the treaty is implemented.

Although a majority of 43 is relatively big for the House of Lords, when peers first voted on a version of this ‘comply with domestic and international law’ amendment in early March the government was defeated by a majority of 102.

Government defeated again on Rwanda bill as peers vote to say it must comply with international law

The government has lost the first vote. The Labour amendment, A1, was passed by 271 votes to 228 – a majority of 43.

In his speech earlier Labour’s Vernon Coaker referred to reports that, if Lords vote to amend the Rwanda bill again today, it will not return to the Commons until after Easter. He said dates set aside for “ping pong” next week had been discarded. He described that as “chaos”, adding:

That’s not our fault it’s coming back after Easter, it’s the government’s own management of its own timetable.

You can read the paper with the full list of amendments to the Rwanda bill being debated in the Lords this afternoon here.

Vernon Coaker tells peers this is not an argument between people who want to stop the boats and people who don’t. He says this is a debate about how it is done.

He says he wants to push his amendment.

Peers are now voting on amendment A1 – the one saying the bill must be enforced “having due regard for domestic and international law”. (See 4.13pm.)

Lords amendments would do 'significant damage' to core purpose of Rwanda bill, minister tells peers

Lord Stewart of Dirleton, the adocate general for Scotland, is winding up this stage of the debate for the government. He claims the opposition amendments would do “significant damage to the core purpose of the bill”.

Claire Fox, who joined the House of Lords after being a Brexit party MEP and who now sits as non-affiliated peer, says she does not support the bill, but objects to those saying supporters of the bill lack compassion. The country has lost control of its borders, she says.

Jenny Jones, a Green peer, goes next, and she broadly agrees with Lipsey. She says the public is more kinder and caring than the government, which she say does not represent public opinion on the Rwanda policy any more.

Lord Lipsey, the Labour peer, is speaking in the Lords now. He says peers normally work on the basis that the will of the elected house should prevail. But the Lords are also there to act as a constitutional backstop, to stop the government going too far?

He says this bill is “perilously near” the point where the Lords should act as a backstop, he says.

The government does not have a mandate for this bill and, with an election so close, it should delay until the election, and let the public decide, he says.

Peers resume debate on Rwanda bill, with Labour making fresh bid to ensure it must comply with international law

In the House of Lords peers are just starting their debate on the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill. As the bill was going through the Lords for the first time, peers passed 10 amendments, all intended to strengthen safeguards for people facing deportation to Rwanda, and on Monday MPs voted them all down when the bill went back to the Commons.

The bill is now in the “ping pong” process – where it will shuttle between the Lords and the Commson until they agree on a text.

There is no real doubt about the outcome; the Lords will eventually back down, as it almost always does. Occasionally at this stage in the process it can secure a minor concession, but there seems to be little chance of that now. The government has said it wants the bill as it was originally passed.

But what is uncertain is how long peers will choose to hold up the bill. “Ping pong” can run to up to about five rounds. In theory the bill could become law this week, but government sources have indicated that if peers vote today to re-insert some of their amendments, the bill might not return to the Commons until after the Easter recess.

Today we are expecting about seven votes on fresh amendments. Peers cannot just retable the amendments voted out by MPs, but what they can do is seek to re-insert new versions of the previous ones.

Vernon Coaker, a Labour home affairs spokesperson, has finished speaking. MPs rejected a Lords amendment saying the bill should be implemented “while maintaining full compliance with domestic and international law”.

Coaker said he had reworded this, and he proposed a new amendment saying the bill has to be implemented “having due regard for domestic and international law”.

He said this is important because, if the government wanted to oppose President Putin, on the grounds that what he was doing was against international law, and if it opposed the Houthis, on the grounds that their attacks on shipping in the Red Sea were against international law, then it should comply with international law in its own legislation.

Deparment of Health publishes bill intended to ensure future generations never smoke

The Department of Health and Social Care has today published its tobacco and vapes bill, the legislation that will very gradually ban smoking by ensuring that children turning 15 this year or younger will never legally be able to be sold tobacco. There is a summary of the measures from the DHSC here, and the bill itself is here.

Commenting on the bill, Rishi Sunak said:

If we want to build a better future for our children we need to tackle the single biggest entirely preventable cause of ill health, disability and death: smoking.

That is why, alongside new measures to curb the alarming rise in youth vaping, we are delivering on our commitment to create a smokefree generation and stop our kids from getting hooked on harmful cigarettes and other nicotine products.

This important change will save thousands of lives and billions of pounds for our NHS, freeing up new resource than can be spent to improve outcomes for patients right across the UK.

Gething accuses UK government of 'unprecedented hostility' to devolution in speech in first speech as Welsh first minister

Vaughan Gething used his first speech in the Senedd after being formally nominated as first minister of Wales to accuse the UK government of “unprecedented hostility” to devolution. He declared:

In recent years we have pushed the boundaries of what is possible with devolution. We did it, for example, to keep Wales safe [during Covid].

But in that same period, we have seen unprecedented hostility towards democratic Welsh devolution from a UK government determined to undermine, frustrate and bypass the Welsh government and this Senedd.

As well as leaving Wales with less say over less money, it is deeply corrosive, wasteful and undemocratic.

As first minister, I look forward to standing up for Wales and for devolution in the weeks and months to come.

Gething, who became first minister after being elected to succeed Mark Drakeford as the leader of the Welsh Labour party, said that he was relishing the chance “to cooperate for Wales with a new UK government that invests in partnership and in Wales’ future”.

He also said it was a matter of pride to be the first Black person to lead a European country – “but also a daunting responsibility for me – and one that I do not take lightly”. He went on:

Today, we can also expect the depressingly familiar pattern to emerge: abuse on social media, racist tropes disguised with polite language.

People questioning my motives and, yes, they will still question or deny my nationality. Whilst others question why I’m ‘playing the race card’.

To those people, I say once more – it is very easy not to care about identity when your own has never once been questioned or held you back.

Gething was elected first minster with the support of Labour MSs (members of the Senedd), as well as Jane Dodds, the Senedd’s only Liberal Democrat member.

The Conservative and Plaid Cymru members voted for their respective party leaders.

Updated

Matt Hancock loses bid to have libel case brought against him by Andrew Bridgen struck out

Matt Hancock, the former health secretary, has lost a bid to have a libel claim brought against him by MP Andrew Bridgen thrown out by a high court judge, PA Media reports. PA says:

Bridgen wants to “clear his name” after allegedly being accused of antisemitism in a “malicious” social media post by Hancock, the court was previously told.

The MP for North West Leicestershire is bringing a libel case against Hancock over a January 2023 tweet that followed Bridgen posting a comment about Covid-19 vaccines.

A judge was told that, on 11 January, Bridgen shared a link to an article “concerning data about deaths and other adverse reactions linked to Covid vaccines”, and stated: “As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust.”

Hours later, Hancock wrote on Twitter – now known as X – that “disgusting and dangerous antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories spouted by a sitting MP this morning are unacceptable and have absolutely no place in our society”.

Bridgen believes “every person reading the tweet knew it was about me”, that it was “seriously defamatory and untrue” and intended to cause “grievous harm” to his reputation, the court was told.

At a preliminary hearing in London earlier this month, Hancock’s lawyers argued the claim against him should be thrown out as it did not have “a realistic prospect of success” and because of the “lack of a properly articulated case”.

In a ruling today, Mrs Justice Steyn “struck out” certain parts of Bridgen’s case but did not dismiss the whole claim, instead giving the Independent MP the opportunity to make amendments and “remedy the deficiencies”.

Sunak to urge Tory MPs at 1922 Committee to 'pull together' and to attack Labour over its record in Birmingham

Rishi Sunak will urge Tory MPs to “pull together” when he addresses them at the 1922 Committee later this afternoon.

Asked at the post-PMQs lobby briefing what Sunak would be saying to his backbenchers, the PM’s press secretary replied:

He will be talking about the local elections and I’m sure they will be talking about that we have got to pull together to make sure Labour don’t do what they have done to Britain, what they have done to Birmingham.

As the PM said, [there have been] eye-watering tax rises, bins uncollected, massive cuts to the arts in Birmingham – it is truly … worse than in the 1970s under Labour leadership there.

So he will be talking about that.

Asked if Sunak was concerned about disunity in the part, the press secretary replied:

He wants everyone going into these local elections taking about the Labour party’s poor record in Birmingham, Wales and London, and that will be the focus of the Conservatives as we go into these important local elections.

The press secretary refused to say whether Sunak had spoken to Penny Mordaunt, the leader of the Commons, about she was being lined up as a unity candidate to replace him, saying she did not want to “get into private discussions between colleagues”

The press secretary also refused to say whether Sunak was disappointed that Mordaunt did not issue a public statement denying the reports.

At the Labour post-PMQs briefing, asked about the PM’s attack on Labour-run Birmingham council (see 12.15pm), a spokesperson for Keir Starmer said Tory-run councils were facing similar problems.

Reform UK drops general election candidate over racist comments on X

Reform UK has dropped a general election candidate after the exposure of a range of racist comments on her social media feed, including comments calling for the deportation of black British born public figures.

The latest controversy over one of the party’s candidates comes as the director general of the BBC, Tim Davie, clashed at a Commons committee with a Labour MP who said that the broadcaster had been forced into a “grovelling apology” for calling Reform “far-right.” (See 10.54am.)

Reform UK told the Guardian on Wednesday that it had acted to remove Ginny H Ball as its Rutland and Stamford candidate for the general election after the exposure of a range of comments on her social media feed, including comments calling for the deportation of black British born public figures.

A series of tweets by Ball were highlighted on X on Tuesday night, including one in which her account suggested that Shola Mos-Shogbamimu should be deported.

After Paulette Hamilton was elected Birmingham’s first black MP, Ball’s account tweeted “Staggered it is still called The black country …. or perhaps not”?

A Reform UK spokesperson said that the party had acted after aspects of her social media were brought to the party’s attention late on Tuesday. Ball’s account on X was protected on Wednesday and her biography on X no longer described her as a Reform UK candidate.

The lord chancellor, Alex Chalk, has defended the bill which will overturn convictions relating to the Post Office IT scandal en masse, saying that it is for the state to fix its own mess, in what are “exceptional and unique circumstances”.

The bill has been criticised as contrary to the rule of law, because parliament is interfering with judicial independence, and for setting a dangerous precedent.

Appearing before the House of Lords constitution committee this morning, Chalk said:

Those of us who value and cherish and are passionate about the rule of law also have to recognise that a miscarriage of justice on this extraordinary scale is of itself an affront to the rule of law.

He said that the sheer number of people affected by the scandal, which resulted in more than 980 convictions, the lapse of time, the loss of evidence in many cases and the loss of faith in the system amounted to “wholly unique circumstances” which justified the bill.

Chalk said he looked extremely carefully at whether the courts could deal with the individual cases but there was a difference of views on whether they had the capacity (the lady chief justice has said that they do) and there was potential for delays which would cause the public to think “the state couldn’t even clear up its mess”.

He also said that parliament had made clear that it did not create a precedent but, in response, Lord Falconer, a member of the committee and former lord chancellor under Tony Blair, said:

How can it not be a precedent that the executive will get parliament to overturn courts on findings of fact, which you would accept undermines fundamentally the rule of law?

PMQs - snap verdict

For all the media chatter about a possible Tory leadership challenge, the majority view in the parliamentary party seems to be that, although they are heading for a massive defeat, there is no evidence a new leader would do much better and so on balance it is best to leave things as they are. The local election results may change that calculation, but it is hard to imagine anything else doing so before May, and that PMQs won’t alter Sunak’s position, for better or worse. He was underwhelming, but no worse than usual.

In fact, the whole session was a bit routine. That was the last PMQs for a month, because the Commons rises for the Easter recess on Tuesday and does not return until Monday 15 April, and that may explain why Keir Stamer decided to open with all-encompassing soundbite that summarised Labour’s case well.

Violent prisoners released early because the Tories wrecked the criminal justice system, 3,500 small boats arrivals already this year because the Tories lost control of the borders, the NHS struggling to see people because the Tories broke it, millions paying more on their mortgages, a budget that hit pensioners, a £46bn hole in his sums. Why is the prime minister so scared to call an election?

The cleverest question of the day came from the SNP’s Stephen Flynn, who found a zinger that managed to skewer the Conservative and Labour (the SNP’s main threat in Scotland). He asked Sunak:

With his backbenchers looking for a unity candidate to replace him, which of the now numerous born-again Thatcherites on the Labour frontbench does he believe best fits the bill?

Even Sunak found this funny.

As for the Sunak/Starmer exchanges, there were two features of particular interest.

First, Sunak is struggling badly with attack material to use against Starmer. He seems to have given up claiming Labour is committed to a £28bn annual green investment plan (Starmer ditched this earlier this year, but for a bit CCHQ tried to claim it was still a runner), and at various moments Sunak tried Labour not being ready for an election (even though they probably are), Labour not having plans (even they do, or at least as many plans as an opposition party), or Labour wanting to put up taxes (even though they say they don’t). Sunak ended up focusing mostly on the claim that Labour is on the side of the people smugglers, that it is soft on crime, and that Starmer as a lawyer once acted in a human rights case for Hizb ut-Tahrir. Does any of this register with anyone who isn’t already a tribal Tory? It does not feel like it, and Starmer’s retort about this being “nonsense” seemed apposite.

Second, this exchange provided yet further evidence that the Rwanda policy, which was supposed to be an election-winning wedge issue for the Tories, increasingly resembles a policy albatross. Starmer won the exchanges on this quite comfortably and the Labour arguments seem to be landing with voters. I covered some for the Savanta polling in the Telegraph earlier (see 9.36am and 9.46am), but some of the most striking figures were those showing that since January there has been a sharp drop in the number of people who think the policy will cut small boat numbers. Even Tory supporters are increasingly gloomy about its prospects.

Tahir Ali (Lab) says Sunak will soon be in opposition. Before then, will he recognise the state of Palestine?

Sunak says the government will do that when it will most help the peace process. But the government wants a two state solution, he says.

And that was the last question.

Andy Slaughter (Lab) says the PM has had advice about the legality of the Israel-Hamas war. Is the PM acting on that advice?

Sunak say he is calling on Israel to respect international humanitarian law. He says he and the foreign secretary have repeatedly made this point to Benjamin Netanyahu. He says the government believes Israel is capable of complying with international law.

Ashley Dalton (Lab) asks about the Tory donor Frank Hester, and his comments about Indian members of staff. Does the PM agree those comments were racist?

Sunak says he addressed this last week.

Sarah Atherton (Con) says Wrexham, her town, is doing well. Does the PM agree that has happened under the Tories?

Sunak says Atherton has been an excellent campaigner for her town.

Dan Carden (Lab) says this parliament will be the worst on record for living standards. Why?

Sunak says living standards ar £1,700 higher in real terms than in 2010. Labour would put taxes up for people, he says.

Sunak urged to back move to 'equalise' abortion time limit for Down's syndrome

Liam Fox (Con) says tomorrow is world’s Down’s syndrome day. He says abortion for Down’s syndrome is allowed up to 40 weeks. Will the PM back changing this so that it is in line with the normal abortion limit?

Sunak says when parliament legislated for abortion, it said doctors should be able to make decisions in difficult cases. He says votes on these issues have always been conscience matters.

UPDATE: Fox said:

While the time limit on abortion in the UK is 24 weeks’ gestation, for Down’s syndrome, due to an anomaly in the law, it is 40 weeks up to full term, something that many members may not understand.

With cross-party support I will be tabling an amendment to the criminal justice bill to equalise the time limit in line with our disability and equality legislation.

Surely we cannot accept in the 21st century that people with Down’s syndrome are second-class citizens in our country.

Will the prime minister support the change?

And Sunak replied:

As he knows, when the grounds for abortion were amended, parliament agreed that doctors were best placed to make those difficult decisions with women and their families.

Also, as he knows, it has been longstanding convention that it would be for parliament to decide whether to make any changes to the law on abortion and these issues have always been treated as an individual matter of conscience.

Updated

Sunak says situation in Gaza 'unsustainable' and urgent action needed to avoid famine

Mark Hendrick (Lab) asks if the PM agrees with the EU’s foreign affairs chief, Josep Borrell, who said Israel was using starvation as a tool of war.

Sunak says the status quo is unsustainable, and that Israel should be allowing more aid into Gaza.

UPDATE: Hendrick said:

The EU foreign policy high representative Josep Borrell said on Monday that Israel is provoking famine in Gaza and using starvation as a weapon of war. President Biden has said that there should be no attack on Rafah without a plan to ensure the safety of more than one million people living there.

Does the prime minister agree with High Representative Borrell and President Biden? Because I do and we need a ceasefire. If he does agree, would he say so here in the chamber today?

And Sunak replied:

The findings from the IPC [Integrated Food Security Phase Classification] are gravely concerning. It is clear that the status quo is unsustainable and we need urgent action now to avoid a famine.

The UK is doing all it can to get more aid in and prevent a worsening crisis: 2,000 tonnes of UK-funded food aid, including flour and hot meals, is being distributed by the World Food Programme in Gaza today as we speak, enough to feed more than 275,000 people, and we will continue to do everything we can to alleviate the suffering that people are experiencing.

Updated

Angela Richardson (Con) invites Sunak to criticise Labour’s plans to build on the green belt.

Sunak says the Tories would protect the green belt, in Guildford and elsewhere.

Layla Moran (Lib Dem) asks about a constituent forced to wait about 24 hours in hospital for an operation that was then cancelled. She says the NHS is being run into the ground.

Sunak says he is sorry to hear about Moran’s constituent’s experience. But the NHS has received record funding from the government, he says. He says waiting lists are coming down.

Sir Edward Leigh (Con) asks if the government will release the RAF Scampton base for regeneration, now that the plans to use if for asylum seekers have been scaled back.

Sunak says the government is looking at this. But he supports the campaigning Leigh has done on this.

Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, asks about the vote at Stormont yesterday to veto a new EU law. He says the DUP secured the right for Stormont to do this. Will the PM confirm that the government will implement the rest of the measures in the Safeguarding the Union report.

Sunak says the government will implement those proposals at pace.

Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader, says given the Tory party is looking for a unity candidate to replace him, which of the Thatcherites on the Labour front bench would do the job best.

Sunak laughs. He says it was surprising to hear Rachel Reeves talking about the 1970s. He says what has happened in Birmingham under Labour, with street lights going out, is reminscent of the 70s.

Flynn says the IFS says Labour and the Tories are in a conspiracy of silence over future spending cuts.

Sunak says he is surprised to hear Flynn talk about the IFS, because the IFS has been critical of the Scottish government’s “tax and axe” budget.

Updated

Starmer says you can see why Sunak does not want an early election. If the Tories cannot stop putting party before country, they should call an election.

Sunak says wages are up, pensions are up, and taxes are down. He says the choice at the election is between tax cuts under the Tories, or going back to square one under Labour.

Starmer says it is sad to see Sunak reduced to this nonsense.

On prisons, he asks if the government will have to send fewer people to prison, or release them earlier.

Sunak says Starmer is soft on crime.

Starmer says he has prosecuted more people smugglers than Sunak has had helicopter rides, and that is a lot. He says the Rwanda policy will cost £2m for every person. He says he knows Sunak likes to spent a lot on jet travel, but even by his standards that is a lot.

Sunak recalls Starmer working for Hizb ut-Tahrir. He says we know who’s side he is on, and it is not the British people’s.

Starmer claims Sunak personally didn't believe Rwanda deportation policy would work

Starmer says Sunak does not even personally believe in the Rwanda policy. How has he spent £600m on a gimmick to deport just 300 people?

Sunak says Labour voted against his plan. He say 900 criminals have been arrested thanks to the government’s new people smuggling laws. If Starmer was not Labour leader, he would want to be their lawyer.

UPDATE: Starmer said:

The Rwanda gimmick is going to cost the taxpayer £2m for every one of the 300 people that they deport.

I know the prime minister likes to spend a lot on jet-setting but that’s some plane ticket. It’s the cost of Tory chaos and it’s working people who are paying the price.

We know the prime minister himself thought it wouldn’t work. If the people selling this gimmick don’t believe in it, why should the country?

Starmer was referring to this leak about Sunak’s doubts about the Rwanda policy.

Updated

Starmer says Labour is ready for the election.

He asks if Sunak can see the flaw in a Rwanda policy that would only deport 1% of arrivals.

Sunak says small boat crossing are down by a third since he became PM. But Labour does not believe in stopping small boats.

Keir Starmer says Vaughan Gething is the first Black leader of any European government. That is a tribute to Wales.

Starmer says prisons are full, border policy is not working, the NHS is not working, people cannot pay their mortages, and the budget had nothing for pensions. Why is the PM not calling an election.

Sunak says Starmer should be grateful, because Sunak is giving him more time to come up with a plan.

Giles Watling (Con) asks Sunak if he agrees that cutting inflation is the best way to help his constituents.

Surprise, surprise, Sunak does agree. He says today’s figures show his plan is working. It has been the steepest fall in inflation since the 1980s, he says.

Rishi Sunak starts by congratulating Vaughan Gething on becoming the Welsh first minister, and thanks Mark Drakeford for his service.

And here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.

Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs

PMQs starts in 10 minutes.

Yesterday I covered quite a lot of comment on the Rachel Reeves’ Mais lecture based on a three-page press release sent out by Labour with advance extracts. The full speech runs to 8,000 words and it is certainly worth a read. Here is some commentary published after the full text was made public.

  • Paul Mason, the former economics journalist who is now an active Labour supporter, says in a blog for the Spectator that Reeves is proposing an approach that should make it easier for the government to justify capital investment. He explains:

Reeves effectively offered markets a trade-off. She set out the same broad fiscal rule as the government: debt falling at the end of five years and a deficit moving towards primary balance. She will make it law that any fiscal decision by government will be subject to an independent forecast of its effects by the OBR. But, she said: “I will also ask the OBR to report on the long-term impact of capital spending decisions. And as Chancellor I will report on wider measures of public sector assets and liabilities at fiscal events, showing how the health of the public balance sheet is bolstered by good investment decisions.”

Why is this so big? Because the OBR does not currently model the ‘long-term impact of capital spending decisions’. It believes that £1 billion of new capital investment produces £1 billion of growth in the first year, tapering to nothing by year five. Furthermore, since 2019 it has repeatedly expressed scepticism that a sustained programme of public investment can produce a permanent uplift in the UK’s output potential.

Since that is precisely what Reeves plans to do, she is telling the OBR to adopt a new, or at least more analytically diverse, approach to fiscal modelling. And she is signalling that the Treasury will start weighing the assets created by borrowing, alongside the liabilities.

As I say, this is not just a message to the OBR, the Treasury and the Bank. It is a message to investors: if Labour can demonstrate, through professional analysis by these institutions, that investment can drive growth, it can win the argument with fund managers for investment here and meet its own fiscal rules more easily.

  • George Eaton at the New Statesman says the Reeves speech contained Reeves’ “most explicit repudiation yet of the model pursued by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s governments”. He says:

In her 8,000-word Mais Lecture, delivered last night at City University, the shadow chancellor offered her most explicit repudiation yet of the model pursued by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s governments. Though she praised New Labour’s record on public service investment and poverty reduction, Reeves warned that the project failed to recognise that “globalisation and new technologies could widen as well as diminish inequality, disempower people as much as liberate them, displace as well as create good work”.

She added that the labour market “remained characterised by too much insecurity” and that “key weaknesses on productivity and regional inequality” persisted. This is not merely an abstract critique – it leads Reeves and Keir Starmer to embrace radically different economic prescriptions.

This is from Gavin Kelly, chair of the Resolution Foundation.

Mais lecture is the most intellectually wide-ranging speech Rachel Reeves has given. Worth reading for takes on Lawson, austerity, New Labour, link between dynamism & worker-security, and how geo-politics changes our national growth story (& more besides)

And this is from the broadcaster and writer Steve Richards.

A substantial and in some respects radical Mais Lecture from Rachel Reeves..a shame it was briefed in advance as channelling Margaret Thatcher when it was partly a repudiation of Thatcher/ Lawson..such shallow game playing wont fool Daily Telegraph readers while ensuring others read the speech through a misleading prism..The speech is worth reading as a thoughtful guide to what might happen next rather than what happened in the 1980s

HMRC halts plan to close tax self-assessment helpline

After PMQs, at about 12.30pm, a Treasury minister will be in the Commons to answer an urgent question tabled by Labour about the decision announced by HM Revenue and Customs yesterday to close its tax self-assessment helpline for six months a year.

The decision caused an outcry. But the minister responding to the UQ should have an easy time because this morning HMRC has announced that it has changed its mind.

In a letter to the Commons Treasury committee, Jim Harra, the HMRC chief executive, said:

Following feedback from concerned stakeholders, the changes to the self-assessment, VAT and PAYE helplines that were announced will be halted while HMRC engages with stakeholders about how to ensure all taxpayers’ needs are met as HMRC shifts more people to online self-service in the longer term.

Our helpline and webchat advisers will always be there for those taxpayers who need support because they are vulnerable, digitally excluded or have complex affairs.

Over the weekend there were various reports suggesting that Penny Mordaunt, the leader of the Commons, was being lined up by some Tories as a possible replacement for Rishi Sunak. Mordaunt did not comment publicly, but her allies said the stories were based on a hostile briefing from her rivals, and, if there ever was a Mordaunt bandwagon, it does not seem to be going anywhere.

Today it is Tom Tugendhat’s turn to be identified as a possible alternative leader. In a Telegraph story, Robert Mendick reports:

The Telegraph has been told that at one meeting held in the past few days, Ms Mordaunt remained the preferred candidate for the party to rally around but Mr Tugendhat ‘s name has also been floated.

Mr Tugendhat, who sits in the cabinet as security minister, did better than expected in the Tory leadership race following Boris Johnson’s resignation in 2022, running an energetic campaign before being knocked out in the third round.

One Tory said: “Colleagues in recent days have openly discussed the merits and demerits of removing the prime minister and if there was a unity candidate who that might be. At a meeting of about a dozen Tory MPs, they spoke openly about how to remove Rishi. Penny remains the most likely unity candidate but Tom Tugendhat is also openly being talked about.”

In response, the Conservative MP Jonathan Gullis told GB News this morning that colleague who thought replacing the leader was a good idea were “idiots”. He said:

The Conservative party, if it changes leader for the fourth time within two years, the British public will go, ‘What on earth is going on with you? You are clowns,’ and we will be booted out of office, not just politely, to an extent that we will have less than 100 MPs …

I like Tom [Tugendhat], I like all my colleagues, apart from the idiots who say some of the things like that [that there should be a leadership contest].

Ed Davey has launched the Liberal Democrats’ local election campaign with photocall which saw him upturning a large hourglass to reveal the words “Time’s running out Rishi!”. Davey claimed even lifelong Tory supporters were fed up with Sunak’s party. He said:

When I speak to lifelong Conservative voters, they tell me that the party no longer speaks for them. Time and time again, they are being failed by this appalling Conservative government.

This government has plunged our NHS into crisis. Left vulnerable people waiting hours for an ambulance, weeks to see a GP or a dentist, and months to start treatment for cancer.

They’ve made the cost-of-living crisis so much worse.

Sending mortgage rates soaring.

Hitting families with unfair tax rises.

And leaving out pensioners altogether in their Budget this month.

They’ve trashed our precious natural environment, letting water companies get away scot-free, as they dump millions of tonnes of raw sewage into our rivers and onto our beaches.

Rishi Sunak’s government is running out of road because people know it is time for change.

BBC's director general Tim Davie defends decision to remove line from report calling Reform UK 'far-right'

Tim Davie, the director general of the BBC, has defended the corporation’s decision to remove a line in a report describing Reform UK as “far-right”.

Speaking at the Commons culture committee this morning, Davie said: “I don’t think far-right is the right label, full stop.”

But he insisted that the BBC had not caved in to pressure from Reform UK. He said the report published at the weekend using that description did attract “a few complaints”, but he said the BBC decided for itself whether the wording was fair, and decided to remove it.

Davie was responding to a question from Labour’s Rupa Huq, who asked about a report yesterday saying that the BBC had apologised to Reform UK for using the term.

Davie said:

My personal view is you’ve got to be a bit careful with far-left, far-right, with parties that carry quite a lot of support.

When Huq said some of the statements from Reform UK candidates were “quite alarming”, and asked Davie where he would place them on the spectrum, Davie replied:

With respect, if we judged our labels by individual quotes from members, I think that would be an interesting strategy in itself.

They are clearly a party on the right of politics. I just think, if you get into far-left or far-right descriptors, and you behave fairly in this, you end up in the wrong territory.

Asked later how he would describe Reform UK, represented by Lee Anderson in the Commons, and the Workers Party of Britain, represented by George Galloway, Davie said he would just say they were respectively they were on the right and the left of politics.

Yesterday Richard Tice, the Reform UK leader, said it was defamatory to call his party far-right and he suggested he might take legal action to stop other news organisations using the labels. But in fact, under English defamation law, political parties cannot sue for libel.

Badenoch says report shows firms wasting time on 'performative' and ineffective equality and diversity measures

Businesses are implementing equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) initiatives without an evidence base, a new report says. As PA Media reports, the independent Inclusion at Work Panel, appointed by business secretary Kemi Badenoch, spoke to more than 100 people in 55 organisations and reviewed the latest research into how employers make decisions about EDI policies and practices in the UK. PA says:

In a report published today, the panel said many employers want “do to the right thing”, but are introducing measures without the support of evidence.

It said that some of those they spoke to cited examples of what “good” practices might look like, but the collection of robust data was “rare” and measurable impact was “scarce”.

“The evidence suggests that many organisations’ D&I approaches are driven by pre-existing notions, assumptions, and pressures rather than empirical evidence,” the report noted.

It highlighted cases where D&I initiatives were found to be counterproductive or unlawful, such as a Ministry of Defence review finding that pressure on the Royal Air Force (RAF) to meet targets for women and ethnic minorities led to unlawful positive discrimination against white men.

It also found that employers face barriers such as a lack of accessible data on EDI measures as well as broad or subjective definitions of terms like “inclusion”.

In a statement on the report, Badenoch said:

Discussions around diversity and inclusion at work are often bogged down by performative gestures. This government wants to ensure employers are doing EDI [equality, diversity and inclusion] in a way that doesn’t undermine meritocracy and aligns with our equality laws.

This report by the Inclusion at Work Panel is a powerful new tool for organisations. It lays out the evidence for good and bad EDI practice and can empower employers to make fairer, more effective EDI decisions that represent proper value for money.

I sincerely hope that businesses will take time to read this report so that it becomes an important step in helping them achieve more inclusive and productive workplaces.

The Telegraph has splashed on the story.

Government has brought adult social care in England ‘to its knees’, MPs say

The government has brought adult social care in England “to its knees” with years of uneven funding and a “woefully insufficient plan” to fill thousands of staff vacancies, MPs have said in a damning report on a system that provides long-term care for 835,000 people. Robert Booth and Emily Dugan have the story here.

And here is the report from the public accounts committee.

Boris Johnson did not consult watchdog over paid role with hedge fund

Boris Johnson did not seek permission from the post-ministerial jobs watchdog before taking a role as a consultant to a hedge fund, on whose behalf he met the Venezuelan president, Henry Dyer reports.

The Savanta polling in the Telegraph has Labour on 44% and the Conservative party on 26%. But it also has Reform UK on 11%, ahead of the Liberal Democrats.

Rishi Sunak to face PMQs and 1922 Committee as poll suggests third of Tory voters want different leader

Good morning. Hands up who’s heard of John Robert Clynes? He was leader of the Labour party at the time of the 1922 general election and, according to a new history of Labour in opposition, he is the only leader of the party ever to be defeated in a leadership challenge. That is extraordinary when you consider that, at least since the 1970s, Conservative leaders normally haven’t resigned at a time of their own choosing and, even if they have not all been forced out after a leadership contest, at least the last three quit because they knew defeat after a leadership challenge was otherwise inevitable.

(Why the difference? Short answer, Labour doesn’t have a 1922 Committee, and its leadership rules are different.)

All of this helps to explain why today is a tricky day for Rishi Sunak; as Conservative party leader, you are permanently on probation, and today he has a tricky “performance appraisal” with his employer – the aforementioned 1922 Committee. He has also got PMQs, another form of performance review.

Last week Lee Anderson defected, and No 10 did not handle the Frank Hester controversy well, leading to leadership challenge chatter reaching perhaps the 7 out of 10 point on the crisis index. But it is not all bad news; today inflation has hit a two and a half year low.

Ahead of his meeting with the 1922 Committee, Sunak has published an article in the Daily Mail restating his commitment to abolish employees’ national insurance. He says:

We are well and truly on the path to sustainably lower taxes.

We started that journey in the autumn with a 2p cut to national insurance worth £450 for the average worker on £35,400 a year. And the Chancellor cut taxes again in this month’s budget which now means that 27 million employees will get an average tax cut of around £900 a year.

We did this because I believe in the fundamental dignity of work. When people work hard, they should be rewarded, not taxed more. It’s not right that income from work is taxed twice, while all other income is only taxed once. This is why I have cut national insurance, the second tax on work, by a third in the last six months. And it is why my long-term plan, ultimately, is to cut it to zero.

But there is bad news for Sunak in the Daily Telegraph. It has published polling from Savanta suggesting more than a third of Conservative voters (37%) want someone else to lead the party into the next election. Only 45% say Sunak should stay in post until polling day.

The book about Labour in opposition is Keeping the Red Flag Flying: The Labour Party in Opposition since 1922 by Mark Garnett, Gavin Hyman, and Richard Johnson. It’s out next month and, on the basis of what I’ve read so far, it’s a very good read if you’re interested in Labour history.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.40am: Ed Davey launches the Lib Dems’ local election campaign.

10am: Tim Davie, the BBC’s director general, gives evidence to the Commons culture committee.

12pm: Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.

Afternoon: Vaughan Gething is due to be nominated in the Senedd at Wales’s next first minister.

Afternoon: Peers vote on amendments to the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill that would reintroduce safeguards originally passsed by the House of Lords, but removed from the bill by MPs on Monday.

5pm: Sunak addresses Conservative MPs at the 1922 Committee.

If you want to contact me, do use 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
Anne Hathaway’s Tonight Show Interview Turned Super Awkward, But Jimmy Fallon’s Joke Saved It
“You want to go to Stephen Colbert if you want to get people who read books. Lame!" The post Anne Hathaway’s Tonight Show Interview Turned Super Awkward, But Jimmy Fallon’s Joke Saved It first appeared on Bored Panda.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
Tim Hortons Is Brewing an Idea of Canada That No Longer Exists
At sixty, the coffee chain’s success proves old habits die hard
The Walrus
The Walrus
Oh dear! Baby gear! Why are the manuals so unclear?
Sure, new parents are an anxious lot. But instruction manuals for devices meant to keep the baby safe and healthy are daunting and add to the anxiety. Why are they so confusing?
WEKU
WEKU
Duane Eddy’s twang remains one of rock’n’roll’s greatest sounds
The late guitarist was rightly ubiquitous in the late 1950s thanks to his otherworldly sound, earning admirers from Bruce Springsteen to John Peel
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Eva Mendes Opens Up About Motherhood And Family Values
Eva Mendes opens up about motherhood, career decisions, and prioritizing family over fame in a candid interview.
Top News
Top News
JJ Redick brutally roasted Shaq for not being able to dunk in high school despite being 7-feet tall
Poor Shaq wasn't always SHAQ.
USA Today Sports Media Group
USA Today Sports Media Group
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play