Newspaper apologises to MP for ‘racist' cartoon
The controversial cartoon depicted Ms Sultana on a raisin box, which she described as 'brownfacing' and mocking her surname.
Ms Sultana criticised The Observer's apology as 'mealy-mouthed' for not explicitly labelling the cartoon as racist or directly naming her.
The cartoon also featured Jeremy Corbyn with communist symbols, satirising the new political party he is forming with Ms Sultana.
Ms Sultana resigned from the Labour Party earlier this month to establish a new political party with Mr Corbyn.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Munroe Bergdorf 'hopeful for Corbyn's new party' as she calls out Labour for no 'backbone'
Munroe Bergdorf has "never been more hopeful" following the announcement of Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana's independent party, but calls on Labour MPs to do better for the trans community Model and trans activist Munroe Bergdoft expressed her disappointment at the Labour party's treatment of trans people in the UK. At the London Trans+ Pride launch event, she told a panel of activists that the Labour party have "shown who they are and have cemented who they are in history." She later added that she has "a lot to shout at this government, but reasoning with them is fruitless." In preparation for London Trans+ Pride, set to take place on July 26, Bergdorf joined a panel consisting of London Trans+ Pride founding member Lewis G Burton, BAFTA-winning writer and activist Sukey Venables-Fisher and Trans Kids Deserve Better members, Merlin and Cliff. Instilling hope into trans people nationwide, she said: "Just like other civil rights movements before us, things will come to fruition for our movement and for our lives." Bergdorf stated she has "never felt so hopeful" after seeing the announcement of Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana's independent party. Earlier this month, Sultana quit Labour and voiced her frustration with the party, saying "Labour has completely failed to improve people's lives." The 31-year-old wrote in a statement posted to X: "Today, after 14 years, I'm resigning from the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn and I will co-lead the founding of a new party, with other Independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country." Bergdorf admitted that she had considered leaving the UK, but now wants to "stay and fight and see growth and support [Corbyn and Sultana's party]." Corbyn confirmed that "real change is coming" and praised Sultana for helping to build "a real alternative." Whilst the new independent party establishes itself, Bergdorf urged the current Labour government to take action for the transgender community. "To everything single MP in the Labour party on the left; it's time for backbone, it's time to actually do something instead of just talking. Join us, come to trans pride. It's time to show urgency." For more stories like this subscribe to our weekly newsletter, The Weekly Gulp, for a curated roundup of trending stories, poignant interviews, and viral lifestyle picks from The Mirror's Audience U35 team delivered straight to your inbox. Bergdorf and the panellists acknowledged that it's been a tough year for trans people, following the UK Supreme Court ruling. In April 2024, the court ruled in favour of so-called 'gender critical' volunteer organisation For Women Scotland in their appeal against the Scottish Government's usage of the term 'woman'. Lord Hodge, Lady Rose and Lady Simler gave a joint judgment, with which the other Justices agreed, passing down an unanimous verdict that the term 'woman' used in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex. Trans charity Gendered Intelligence told the Mirror at the time that they were disappointed at the ruling, and said the judgement is "likely to empower those who want to exclude trans people, but we trust that this remains a small minority." At the London Trans+ Pride panel, Bergdorf called for meaningful trans allyship, stating that "directing traffic, money, support and awareness to services that support us is paramount... If people are going to be allies they need to make it worth it." Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We'd love to hear from you!
Telegraph
13 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves challenges Cabinet to buy British
Rachel Reeves has challenged Cabinet ministers to do more to buy British as she seeks to boost flagging economic growth. The Chancellor and Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, sent out the message in a letter to the Cabinet. It urged ministers to use procurement contracts, which are in the Government's gift, to help generate jobs in the UK by supporting British companies. The intervention comes amid a consultation about whether rules can be changed to give the Government more freedom to give contracts to UK firms. Each year £400bn is spent in public sector procurement, meaning small changes in approach could have a significant impact. Ms Reeves is facing difficult economic circumstances in her Budget this autumn, with official growth forecasts halved for 2025. New tax rises appear increasingly inevitable given that pressure on the public finances has intensified and the Chancellor will not break her borrowing rules. Excerpts of the letter from Ms Reeves and Mr McFadden were shared with The Telegraph. The pair wrote: 'We want people around the UK to feel the full impact of government spending through investment in skills and high quality jobs. That's why we're going further to ensure public procurement expenditure boosts British industry, jobs, skills, productivity, and expands the supply side. 'Every department needs to be pulling this procurement lever to support economic growth and strengthen our economic security. It is possible to do this within our trade agreements, as other countries do.' They added: 'We are asking all Secretaries of State to satisfy themselves that your department, and arms length bodies, have the commercial capacity and capability to ensure the creation of British jobs, productivity enhancing opportunities, and skills are prioritised in every major contract.' They also told colleagues to 'set ambitious and stretching targets for increasing your procurement spend with SMEs (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) and social enterprises while stripping away requirements and processes that are barriers to these firms competing with established players'. At one point they wrote: 'Your commercial team is not a back office function – it is a strategic policy lever and must be a priority.' Ms McFadden was once Sir Tony Blair's political secretary and has emerged as a key confidant of Keir Starmer in recent years. As the most senior minister in the Cabinet Office he is overseeing cross-government attempts to tackle Whitehall bureaucracy and make savings in the civil service. Whether the rhetoric of Ms Reeves and Mr McFadden will lead to a step change in procurement approach remains to be seen. During the Conservatives' 14 years in office government ministers often talked publicly about the importance of using the Government machine to support British businesses. A consultation issued by the Cabinet Office is looking at changes to procurement rules that make it easier for the government to boost British industry. It will report back in September.
The Independent
42 minutes ago
- The Independent
There won't be a wealth tax – but Rachel Reeves can't afford to rule it out just yet
Normally, when politicians decline to rule something out, a sceptical media and public believe they are about to do it. But there should be one exception to this rule. Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves and other ministers are refusing to rule out introducing a wealth tax in this autumn's Budget, when the chancellor is likely to raise taxes by at least £20bn to stick within her fiscal rules. I'm told Starmer and Reeves will not bring in a new wealth tax, such as the 2 per cent levy on assets of more than £10m advocated by a growing number of Labour MPs and Neil Kinnock, the party's former leader, to raise £10bn. A wealth tax is an easy slogan and fits on to a banner. It would do nicely for the Starmer allies hoping to nudge him in a more progressive direction as he seeks a long overdue 'story' for his government. But Reeves and Starmer are not convinced. The chancellor thinks wealth taxes don't work. Twelve developed nations had them in 1990s but only three remain; only one, in Switzerland, brings in lots of money. Reeves burnt her own fingers by targeting non-doms – a process begun by Jeremy Hunt, the outgoing Tory chancellor. I'm told Reeves privately dismissed fears the rich would respond by leaving the UK, saying: "They always say that, but it never happens." It is happening, and she is now considering changing her plan to make worldwide assets, including those in foreign trusts, liable to inheritance tax. One government insider told me: 'People can choose where to pay their taxes. It's very easy to move countries and they are doing it.' A new wealth tax would be complex, take years to introduce and probably not be worth the candle. Dan Neidle, founder of Tax Policy Associates, said its study found such a tax would 'lower long-run growth and employment, thanks to a decline in foreign and domestic investment. It would make UK businesses more fragile and less competitive, and create strong incentives for capital reallocation and migration.' Why not just say no to a wealth tax now? Reeves offered one explanation to her Tory predecessor Norman Lamont at a Lords committee hearing this week. He told her he found it 'a bit strange' the government has not ruled out the move. Reeves replied that if she ruled out one tax rise, the media would move on to the next option, and assume that one was going to happen if she failed to rule it out. A fair point – but not her only reason. Reeves and Starmer need to build bridges with the parliamentary Labour Party after it filleted their welfare legislation, so rejecting a wealth tax now would inflame tensions. I suspect that when the Budget comes, Reeves and her allies will whisper to Labour MPs they are introducing a form of wealth tax through other measures, while avoiding headlines about implementing a specific one. Another reason not to rule out a wealth tax is to help message discipline. Labour certainly needs more of that: ministers unwittingly fuelled speculation about tax rises in media interviews by giving different definitions of "working people'. Far easier to say taxes are a matter for the Budget and we don't comment in advance. Some senior Labour figures think Reeves's reticence is because she is considering proposals that are close to being a wealth tax – for example, increasing property-based taxes. I think she should bring in higher council tax bands for the most expensive properties. It's ludicrous that this tax is based on 1991 property values, and that in England, people in homes valued at more than £320,000 pay the same amount in their local authority. Reform could be sold as a genuine levelling up measure the Tories flunked as it would cut bills in the north and Midlands while raising them in the south. Alternatively, Reeves could increase capital gains tax for the second Budget running, perhaps by bringing it into line with income tax rates, which are higher. Some in government favour a rise in income tax with the money earmarked for defence, as I have suggested. Another option is to raise the top rate of income tax from 45 per cent to 50 per cent. But both ideas would leave Labour open to the charge of breaching its manifesto pledge not to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT. Reeves could argue that circumstances had changed in a more dangerous world. But breaking its promise might be a step too far for an already deeply unpopular PM and party. I don't think there will be a wealth tax. However, the rich shouldn't celebrate. The Budget will increase existing taxes on the wealthy, in line with the government's mantra of protecting "working people", while ensuring 'those with the broadest shoulders carry the greatest burden'. Health warning: creating losers is not pain-free for them or the government, as Reeves discovered when she brought in the ' family farms tax '. But reforming some taxes under a better banner – 'fair tax' – is her best shot.
