Anas Sarwar 'must cut ties' to Tony Blair Institute amid Gaza plan row
Plans outlined in a slide deck, titled the 'Great Trust', were shared with US president Donald Trump and included a proposal to pay half a million Palestinians to leave the area and replace them with private investors to develop Gaza.
According to the newspaper, the TBI did not author or endorse the final slide deck, but two members of its staff were involved in message groups and calls as the project developed.
READ MORE: Wes Streeting calls John Swinney an 'analogue politician' amid NHS row
This has led to backlash, with the SNP saying the Scottish Labour leader and the Prime Minister have 'real and urgent questions to answer'.
SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said it was 'common knowledge' that Starmer's Downing Street political operation and Scottish Labour are 'inextricably linked and influenced' by the Tony Blair Institute.
We previously reported on how Scottish Labour are reportedly consulting with TBI, which has previously called for more private involvement in the NHS, on its health policies ahead of the Holyrood 2026 election.
(Image: PA)
'The Tony Blair Institute has been involved with a group who were developing a plan which amounts to ethnic cleansing in the Gaza strip. It is one more awful stain on Tony Blair's shameful legacy in the Middle East,' Flynn (above) said.
'Given their close co-operation and ties to the Tony Blair Institute, real and urgent questions now need to be answered by both Keir Starmer and Anas Sarwar. It is common knowledge that their senior teams are inextricably linked and influenced by this Institute which, we now know, was present when a plan to steal Palestinian land and livelihoods was being developed.'
The SNP MP added: 'Both Starmer and Sarwar have at least three urgent questions to answer - will they come out and publicly condemn the former Labour Party Leader, Tony Blair, whose Institute has been part of this sickening plan? Will they fully reveal their own dealings with this Institute and their team's involvement with the staff who were aware of this sickening plan? And will they now commit to cut all ties and all funding to the Tony Blair Institute?
"If the Labour Party fails to immediately cut ties to the Tony Blair Institute, it will also severely undermine their credibility in achieving a two state-solution in the region.
'The Labour Party were shamefully slow in calling for a ceasefire in Gaza and the UK Labour Government is still authorising the sale of arms to an Israeli Government that is engaged in the collective punishment of the Palestinian people. These revelations are another part of that shameful story for the Labour Party and their neglect for the plight of the Palestinian people.'
Scottish Labour and Labour have been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Is Labour losing Wales to Reform?
👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈 Could Reform UK get their first taste of government next year? They're the biggest party for Welsh voters, according to exclusive polling from More in Common ahead of the Senedd elections next year. But what does this mean for Labour? The party was founded in Wales and since devolution in 1999, they've run the government there. Are they now scared of Reform? So in this extra episode of Electoral Dysfunction, Beth meets Wales's first female First Minister - Labour's Eluned Morgan. She's also been taking the temperature with a group of Welsh voters. They talk about the "Farage surge" in Wales ahead of the Senedd elections next May as Baronness Morgan admits the threat from Reform is "very serious" and that Labour have got "a lot of work to do" to stay in power. Also - the first minister attempts to swerve rating the Keir Starmer's first year... but Beth's not letting her get away with it.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
To those who question what Labour stands for – look at Best Start. It will change Britain's future
They hunt high and low for Labour's missing message, vision, purpose or identity. Well, here it is, where it always was, in the future of children. It's what Labour does best, what it is for: building a society where children come first and everything else falls into place. The foundations have now been laid by Bridget Phillipson by finally bringing back Sure Start to England – the most successful achievement of the last Labour government – now rebranded as Best Start family hubs. It's a pity about the new name, but young parents recognise 'hubs', whereas Sure Start is largely gone and forgotten. Its uprooting began the day Michael Gove arrived as education secretary in 2010. He entered the 'Department for Children, Schools and Families' – a name chosen to reflect the awareness that children don't learn without wraparound care for their whole lives – and replaced it with the Gradgrind 'Department for Education'. Family stuff was flimflam, distracting from rote learning, and arts, music, drama and sports were expunged from his Ebacc's core subjects. Labour's identity and purpose is captured in Best Start's view of what makes children thrive. In a short time Phillipson will be rolling out across England free universal breakfast clubs, 300 nurseries in primary schools, nurseries for babies from nine months old, and 30 hours a week free childcare for preschool children in September. That's a blessing for working parents, but its prime purpose is infant education, where most good is done for life chances. A new database will now link all hub services to Wes Streeting's new neighbourhood health centres, helping to identify vulnerable children. Labour pledges £1.5bn over three years to fund 1,000 family hubs – at least one in every council in England. Councils, even those run by Reform UK, will be forced to use this money on Best Starts. More hubs will follow in the next spending round: it took 10 years to establish Sure Start, and even then many of the 3,600 centres were still in their early phases, not yet offering all the health visitors, midwives, speech and language therapy, children's mental health services, parental support, employment, debt and addiction support and many other services. Sadly, some beautiful, purpose-built centres were sold off in post-2010 vandalism. When fully functioning, they were life-changing: Angela Rayner speaks for many when she talks emotionally about how a Sure Start course taught her as a teenage mother to hug and read to her son, breaking a generational cycle. This time, Labour says it is determined to cement Best Start into the national psyche, making it as untouchable as the NHS, so it is unthinkable for future governments to wreck it again. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), monitoring Sure Start's lasting effects, finds that those living near a Sure Start centre in their early years 'performed significantly better in assessments at ages 7, 11 and 16', and achieved better GCSE results. At 15 they had 15% fewer absences from school. Sure Start children had many fewer hospitalisations, with fewer injuries and poisonings, 'likely reflecting improved safety in the home environment', and 'an improvement in family functioning'. Teenagers suffered fewer depressive and anxiety disorders, while 12- to 14-year-olds had 50% fewer mental health hospitalisations. Because they caught problems early, fewer Sure Start children needed Send plans in school. This research raises hopes that Best Start will lead to fewer children needing education, health and care plans (EHCPs). But, unlike with the disastrous plans to cut disability benefits, Labour should wait for the plan to succeed and for the need to drop naturally, and not cut support first. Here's why this is being positioned as the emblem of Labour's prime purpose: Sure Start reduced inequalities, and was the best way to improve outcomes for the most disadvantaged. These children would, the IFS calculates, earn £11 more for every £1 of Sure Start investment, while the state would gain £ for the £2.5bn cost. Here's the IFS's conclusion. 'The impacts of Sure Start were remarkably long lasting.' And those effects may be even stronger than can be proved, since inadequate data means all children living near a Sure Start centre were counted as benefiting, including those with no contact, diluting the results. For those who seek a defining Labour project, this is it. Best Start hubs must be the flagship for future spending – the roots of a better society. Imagine if Sure Start had flourished and grown over the past 14 years, and if each cohort of children year after year had emerged better, instead of falling back. Phillipson revealed the cost of backsliding in a speech in Sunderland last week. The social gap between children arriving at primary school widened in the Tory years: a quarter are not fully toilet trained, a third can't follow instructions, half can't sit still, and reception teachers lose two and half hours a day catching these children up, to the detriment of the rest. That disadvantage gap at five years old is still there at 16. As Best Start begins the repairs, it should start by including left-out two-year-olds with unemployed parents – the most deprived, who for bizarre reasons are currently denied full-time nursery. Best Start alone is not enough. The cardinal pledge is that child poverty will fall steeply by the next election, as it has under every Labour government: Rachel Reeves and other ministers confirm this whenever they are asked. I am convinced that the child poverty taskforce led by Phillipson and Liz Kendall, reporting in the autumn, will remove the two-child benefit cap. Ignore the revengeful, anonymous No 10 briefer who taunted benefit rebels by saying that plans to remove the cap were 'dead in the water'. Phillipson admits the expensive welfare U-turn makes it harder, but I can't see the cap surviving. Counter-briefings I have heard say it is unthinkable that the taskforce will leave it in place. Listen when she says her 'driving mission' is to 'break the link between [a child's] background and what they go on to achieve'. How else would that be achieved? The way forward is clear: Starmer and Reeves must make Best Start core to every speech they give. Children come first, in everything. Triple-locked pensions, social care and even the NHS must give way to children. The children's commissioner for England today reports that 'children are living in 'Dickensian levels' of poverty'. Neil Kinnock has a suggestion: raise the money from the very richest. A 2% wealth tax on those who have £10m or more would yield £24bn – a plan that gets strong support from three-quarters of voters. Pain and political trouble beckon at the next budget. It's time for this government to do something popular: pay for children's future with the proceeds of past inequality. Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Benjamin Netanyahu is nominating Donald Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize
Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu took a victory lap on Monday to hail their recent joint strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities as an unmitigated success Benjamin Netanyahu has nominated Donald Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize. The Prime Minister of Israel, 75, handed the US leader a letter during a three-hour meeting on Monday, which he claimed was the nominating he has sent the Nobel committee. Mr Netanyahu was full of praise for the US President, 79, as the duo lauded their recent joint strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. "He's forging peace as we speak, one country and one region after the other," Mr Netanyahu told reporters, following the meeting, which also involved top aides, at the White House. The politicians also discussed efforts to push forward with a 60-day ceasefire proposal to pause the 21-month conflict in Gaza. After he was handed the letter, Mr Trump told Mr Netanyahu: "Coming from you in particular, this is very meaningful." The Israeli leader has for years pressed Mr Trump and his predecessors to take military action against Iran's nuclear programme. READ MORE: Texas Senator seen holidaying in Europe as flood death toll reaches 100 Mr Trump ordered US forces to drop "bunker-buster" bombs and fire a barrage of Tomahawk missiles on three key Iranian nuclear sites last month. It allowed Mr Netanyahu, who has been in charge of Israel since December 2022, to further ingratiate himself with Mr Trump, who for years has made little secret of the fact he covets a Nobel Peace Prize and sees himself as a capable peacemaker. Mr Trump, currently in his second spell as President, trumpeted recent truces his administration facilitated between India and Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, and Israel and Iran. And the former businessman maintained similar confidence after yesterday's meeting. He told reporters: "I think things are going to be really settled down a lot in the Middle East. They respect us and they respect Israel... We have scheduled Iran talks, and they want to. They want to talk." Mr Netanyahu was also triumphant following his third visit to the White House this year. He too expressed optimism that his country's success in Iran would mark a new era in the Middle East. Yet Mr Trump, whose policies have largely aligned with Israel's own priorities, pledged last week to be "very firm" with Mr Netanyahu on ending the war, without saying what that would entail. Pressure by Mr Trump has worked on Mr Netanyahu in the past, with a ceasefire deal having been reached right as the president was taking office again. Mr Netanyahu has to balance the demands of his American ally with the far-right parties in his governing coalition, which hold the key to his political survival and oppose ending the war. Eytan Gilboa, an expert on US-Israel affairs at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv, had said: "Trump thinks that Netanyahu owes him, and if Trump thinks that he needs to end the war In Gaza, then that is what he will need to do."
