Cross-party body seeks to tackle divisions in wake of 2024 summer riots
The cross-party body, led by former Tory home secretary Sir Sajid Javid and Labour MP Jon Cruddas, says it will seek to examine what the Prime Minister last year called the 'cracks in our foundation'.
It has support from across the political spectrum, including the backing of Sir Keir Starmer's Government.
The group will develop a series of evidence-based recommendations for measures to build more social cohesion across the four nations.
Former Green Party leader Caroline Lucas, ex-Tory mayor of the West Midlands Sir Andy Street, and former counter-extremism tsar Dame Sara Khan are among its members.
Sir Sajid, who served in the Cabinets of David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson, said successive administrations had treated social cohesion as a 'second-tier' issue.
He said governments had responded 'only when tensions spill over and too often ignoring the root causes.'
'This commission has been established to do what governments alone cannot: take a long view, propose radical policy changes and — crucially — help forge a cross-society consensus about how we want to live together now and in the future,' Sir Sajid said.
Former veteran Labour MP for Dagenham and Rainham Mr Cruddas said the commission would seek to respond to one of 'the most pressing and persistently neglected issues' facing Britain.
He said: 'This won't be a top-down exercise. Over the next year, we'll be listening directly to people across the UK – drawing on their experiences to help shape practical, long-term answers to the forces pulling us apart.'
The commission is being facilitated by the Together Coalition founded by Brendan Cox, the husband of the Labour MP Jo Cox who was murdered by a far-right extremist.
It was established in the aftermath of a wave of violent disorder that swept across parts of the UK last summer following the Southport stabbings.
False information spread on social media about the identity of the attacker, later found to be 18-year-old Axel Rudakubana, was widely seen as playing a role in fuelling the unrest.
The disturbances, which saw mosques and hotels housing asylum seekers targeted, were denounced at the time as 'far-right thuggery' by Prime Minister Sir Keir.
Although not officially Government-sponsored, the commission is being supported by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
A spokesperson for the ministry said: 'We want to put an end to community division, which is why we are driving £15 million into towns and cities across the country through the Community Recovery Fund.
'This will provide vital support to areas affected by recent unrest – such as £5.6 million for Southport to help rebuild the town.
'We are supportive of the work that the Together Coalition is undertaking, and we look forward to following the commission's progress.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
30 minutes ago
- The National
SNP policy should 'embrace the defence industry', say ex-MPs
The Scottish Government's current stance is not to use public money to fund the manufacturing of munitions. The Times reports that the First Minister has faced intensive lobbying, including from Holyrood backbenchers in the party, to relax the ban on such projects. And now, former Westminster leader Ian Blackford has called for investment in defence to 'kick-start the delivery of an industrial future for Scotland'. READ MORE: Inside the SNP's political strategy ahead of 2026 Scottish election Meanwhile, former SNP Westminster defence spokesperson Stewart McDonald branded the ban as a 'stupid policy'. It emerged in May that a specialist welding skills centre in Glasgow, planned by Rolls Royce, could be a risk after it was deemed to not be eligible for £2.5 million of Scottish Enterprise funding. UK Defence Secretary John Healy described the decision as 'student union politics', prompting a furious response from Scottish Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon. Writing in the Times, Blackford (below) said: 'Investment in defence, though, can be a lever and transformative in itself in generating economic growth. (Image: PA) 'With the increase in defence spending requiring £60 billion-plus, it is beyond doubt that we need to make sure that Scotland gets its fair share, and I know the Scottish Government will be standing up for Scotland's interest in making it happen.' He pointed to Swinney stating that he had no objections if a company came to Scotland to set up a munitions factory, adding: 'There is a need to replenish munitions in support of the defence of Ukraine. In doing this, though, there are red lines and that means munitions supplied in the needs of strategic defence interests and never in situations such as Gaza where civilians are targeted.' 'ADS, the umbrella body for the industry, points out that the sector today employs 33,500 workers and delivers a value added of £3.2 billion, with an output per worker of £95,000,' he added. READ MORE: Home Office staff concerned over 'absurb ban on Palestine Action' 'These figures make it self-evident that there is an economic prize in attracting defence investment into Scotland.' Elsewhere, McDonald told Scotland on Sunday that the defence industry has a 'very awkward' relationship wih the Scottish Government. He branded the ban on investments relating to munitions 'a stupid policy', also criticising the restrictions in place for the Scottish National Investment Bank. 'Defence is the one industry that has enormous growth happening in it right now and that's not likely to end [any] time soon,' McDonald said. 'So why should our National Investment Bank not invest in it? 'It's entirely normal in every other country in Europe or the world for your national institutions to support your national interests, including your national security interests. "So why is the Scottish National Investment Bank not doing that? I think that's mad.' A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'We recognise the importance of the aerospace, defence and shipbuilding sectors for Scotland's economy. Together they provide high value jobs, support across the wider supply chain and make a valuable contribution to local, regional and national economies.' 'Scottish ministers have been consistently clear on the Scottish government's long-standing policy position that it does not use public money to support the manufacture of munitions,' they added.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Can anyone truly say Holyrood been a great success? I can't
The noise about which union Scotland should be in crowds out any real assessment of whether all is well within Scotland itself. The point of devolution was not to create a rival Government which could do what it liked but to create one with extensive powers over matters within Scotland which directly affect the daily lives of people here. Read More: Having a Parliament in Scotland whose job did not include things like energy policy, banking regulation, foreign policy and defence is not a weakness it is a strength. It enables the Parliament to concentrate, from a solely Scottish perspective, on things like health and education as well as dealing with issues which within a British context might not get the focus or priority they deserve such as ferries and roads. The system for electing the Scottish Parliament was designed to prevent one party gaining control and encourage consensus through a need for co-operation between parties in order to pass legislation. The Scottish Parliament was given no revising chamber but instead relied on Committees to make sure legislation proposed by the Executive was properly scrutinised and challenged. You would be hard pushed, whatever your political persuasion and view on Scotland's place in the world, to say the Scottish Parliament has been a great success. Economic growth, an essential foundation of a successful and cohesive society, has been lower in Scotland than the UK as a whole over the long term. Taxes are higher. Outcomes in health and education are poorer despite more money. Scotland specific issues such as transport links to the islands and the highlands have been - and still are - appallingly managed. Too long a domination by the SNP has reduced questioning of the Scottish Government's performance. If you don't salute the Saltire you can kiss goodbye to funding from the Scottish Government or a chance to gain a senior position in public life. Worse, we have turned in on ourselves. Scotland, which has a proud record of contribution to the world, now looks only at its own feet. Shakespeare bad, some second-rate Scottish poet good. Scottish history only. A complete unwillingness to learn anything new about the provision of public services if the source of innovation is England. There are some specific and intertwined problems. First, a misunderstanding of what democracy is. What it is not is the belief that if you get 50 per cent plus one on any vote you have a mandate do what you like. In a healthy democracy dissenting voices need to be heard, minority views respected and genuine consensus built. The SNP, especially under Nicola Sturgeon, understood none of those things. Second, the system itself has not worked as intended. Low grade people have ended up in our Parliament. Can you name any of your Region's List MSPs? How many outstanding MSP's are there? - one hand will be quite enough for the count. The parties have far too great a grip. Want to get into Parliament as a List MSP? - better toe the party line or your place in the order will be too low to have any chance. Sitting on a Committee scrutinising misguided and poorly thought through legislation? - better not challenge things as you will be moved further down the List or de-selected and be out on your ear at the next election. Occasionally there are individual heroes like Andy Wightman whose crucial vote meant the Committee investigating whether Nicola Sturgeon misled Parliament found she had, His reward? - to be hounded out of the Green Party. More recently Fergus Ewing, a delicious thorn in the side of loopy Government ministers and their daft legislation. He has left the SNP and will stand as an independent next time. Whatever your views on the Union vote for him if you can. Reform is needed to improve the quality of debate and outcome in the Scottish Parliament. The key problem - but also opportunity - is the hold parties have on their List MSP's. That control needs to be broken and two simple reforms could achieve this. First, when you cast your List vote for a party in elections for the Scottish Parliament you should then be able to rank the candidates for the party you have chosen in the order you prefer. Voters not parties should determine a candidate's place on the List. That way when voters see a candidate of real calibre they can boost their chances of being elected. This would incentivise parties to put forward capable candidates rather than idiots. Second, allow List MSP's to sit in Parliament for only one term. At a stroke the party control would be broken and List MSP's could put country before party when necessary. The more rapid turnover of people in the Parliament this would bring about would also be welcome. New people means fresh ideas. Fixing the problems is not too hard but the first step would be an acknowledgement that the problems are there and they matter. Guy Stenhouse is a notable figure in the Scottish financial sector. He has held various positions, including being the Managing Director of Noble Grossart, an independent merchant bank based in Edinburgh, until 2017
Wales Online
an hour ago
- Wales Online
What Eluned Morgan's Welsh Labour needs to do to win the Senedd election
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info On Saturday night, some of Labour's biggest hitters were in a room listening to the findings of hours of polling and analysis about what the numbers show about Labour's electoral chances in 2026. The Welsh Election Study is a comprehensive piece of work that looks at voting patterns and results from the 2024 general election, and the results did not make comfortable listening for Labour but anyone who left that room thinking the words can be ignored would be wrong. The Welsh Government was not popular at the general election, people viewed it negatively, but Labour still did well, because the UK Government was less popular. On key metrics like education and the NHS, people think services have got worse, and it is the Welsh Government's fault. That is clearly a problem for Labour. People think their standard of living has got worse, but for that they blamed the UK Government mainly, but it still wasn't good news for the Welsh Government. That discontent is playing out in polls - more than now one - projecting the party which has had a longstanding record of success in Wales will get 18% of the vote at the Senedd election in just over 10 months time. Of course, it is more than just Labour policies, there are global matters at play, there is a tendency across the western world to turn away from established politics. Populist politicians and parties are doing well the world over. Wars, finances, the economic climate are all things out of Labour's control. But when this room of experts were asked to list the thing they think Labour needs to do, the message was fairly simple. Labour in Wales needs a clear set of simple messages and with a clear intended audience. That's not so hard, is it? Well, maybe. The background is this, UK Labour is targeting its attacks at Reform. But it's not really clear why when you look at who voted for Reform UK in 2024, thus giving us an insight who may do it in 2026. We know Reform is expected to do well in the election in May 2026 and it could end up as the biggest party, so too could Plaid Cymru. With the obvious disclaimers that the election is a long way away, far from the front of most peoples' minds, and that polling is just a snapshot in time, there is one thing crystal clear - no-one expects it to be Labour. And yet, Eluned Morgan keeps talking about Nigel Farage and the danger his party poses. The First Minister made that clear when she said they were a "real danger" to the NHS in Wales, workers rights, public services. However, it isn't (on the whole) Labour voters - the WES data shows - who are going to vote for them. UK Labour keeps targeting Reform policies too - despite the same being true in England too. Reform isn't taking swathes of Labour voters. The support Labour is losing is mainly, Plaid, but also Lib Dems and Greens. Reform is gaining support in Wales is coming from a combination of new voters (those who don't normally vote) and disaffected Conservatives. And yet it was Reform that Keir Starmer, Jo Stevens and Eluned Morgan mainly chose to target - although the latter two did mention Plaid Cymru too. The message from academic experts at the party event was to work out who they are focusing on. The other message that came from the event was that the messages need to be simple. The First Minister told BBC Wales' Sunday Supplement she "I am responsible for making sure the party has a clear sense of direction and purpose within Wales". She spoke on the radio that she was focusing on the "bread and butter issues". And yet, that is one of the biggest criticisms from her within the party - that there isn't clear direction. There are concerns she has far too many communications advisors, and not enough focusing on actual policy, resulting in a scattergun approach. When her party colleagues went to Llandudno, they heard her speech cover the bases you'd expect - well rehearsed pledges about waiting times and potholes - and she added in commitments to mental health and £5m to tidying up towns (albeit divisible by 22 local authorities) but there was also an eight minute segment about Artificial Intelligence committing money, resources, and now a pre-election pledge to something, quite frankly, something that many simply don't understand how Wales would ever have a stake in. There was widespread confusion why, in a central speech at a crucial time, the First Minister spent eight minutes of her speech talking about AI and committing £2.5m to the development of "excellence zone" in Wales. It was, more than one person said, typical of the chaotic approach at the top of Welsh Labour, with ideas switched between at the drop of a hat. No-one really saw that coming, and knows what it actually means in Wales, nor what £2.5m of funding can actually do to achieve. It is just pennies in a vast virtual ocean. She is facing repeating questions too about her influence on Keir Starmer's government. While Eluned Morgan kept telling journalists that Welsh Government pressure had helped force the welfare u-turn, but the pressure came from rebelling MPs. When Eluned Morgan's Welsh Government wrote a letter detailing the impact the welfare cuts will have on Wales, only five MPs signed it. So it's no surprise she faced questions what her role as Welsh Labour leader means in terms of the 27-strong bloc of MPs who represent Wales. Eluned Morgan says the next election is a "moment of reckoning". She isn't wrong. When we asked her if this focus on Nigel Farage risked glamorising the party too much sway in Wales she was clear, "there is nothing glamorous about Reform". The problem she has is convincing people there is something glamorous about Welsh Labour.
