Sir David's dig about lawyers drew a prim response from the PM. The House didn't warm to Starmer's tone... QUENTIN LETTS on SAS veterans
Col Collins was the Royal Irish Regiment commander who in 2003, before the Iraq war, gave his men a speech about death and honour and the imperatives both of ruthlessness in battle and magnanimity in victory. It ended with the stirring words 'our business now is north'.
Anyway, he and the mesquite guy and their friends were in the Commons to hear Sir David Davis (Con, Goole & Pocklington) urge the Prime Minister to stop the legal harassment of former soldiers who served in Northern Ireland. The Government, whose attorney-general Lord Hermer KC once represented Gerry Adams, intends to undo a 2023 law which gave soldiers part-immunity from such prosecutions. It is the sort of area in which Sir Keir and his old buddy Hermer kept themselves busy in their professional days. We may guess their instincts.
PMs can not always indulge their youthful radicalism. They must consider bigger concepts such as military morale, natural justice and public sentiment, which is not necessarily as fussed about dead IRA terrorists' human rights as certain fancy KCs might be.
Sir David spoke up, for the sixth time in recent months, for veterans who could be 'exposed to legal persecution for crimes they did not commit'.
Up in the gallery, Col Collins and his neighbours listened impassively. When lobby groups visit Parliament they normally do much nodding and craning of necks to demonstrate their emotional involvement. These Army boys did none of that. They just sat there like troopers awaiting the first shot of a skirmish. They were controlled. Intent.
Sir David noted that during the Troubles there was never a shortage of legal oversight for the security forces. 'No bullet went unscrutinised. Our soldiers were held to the highest standard of law. The IRA were not. They tortured and shot men in the back.'
Yet now the Government intended to prosecute 'our own men' over split-second decisions taken decades ago.
The House, which had earlier been in a rather silly mood, listened to all this in silence. Sir David has, over the years, rebelled enough against his own whips to have earned the right to be heard. To swelling agreement he asked: 'Will the Government protect our veterans or sacrifice them to politically motivated lawyers trying to rewrite history with a pack of lies?'
There followed, from Sir Keir, a 15-sentence reply that was oddly tone-deaf and, I fear, horribly revealing. For it was quickly evident that Sir David's line about 'politically motivated lawyers' had irked Sir Keir. Touched a nerve, you might even say.
He complained that the final part of Sir David's question had lacked 'seriousness'. 'We have to get this right,' he said primly, 'but we don't get there by cheapening the debate. It's not about political point scoring.'
'Cheapening the debate' and 'scoring points'? If anyone were guilty of that, it wasn't David Davis. The House did not warm to Sir Keir's reply. Some MPs growled at it. Sir David himself looked startled that the Prime Minister had responded with such lack of, well, seriousness.
As for Col Collins and his men, they flinched not an inch, or in the case of the hard-as-mesquite man, a twig.
One sensed that they were unsurprised. Soldiers, and others who put their lives on the line for our safety, seldom have much time for lawyers.
After PMQs there was an urgent question about the future of jury trials, which are under threat. During this discussion a justice minister, Sarah Sackman KC, spoke of the 'revered judge' who had come up with this grotty proposal. One often hears lawyers describe judges as 'distinguished' (they love the word). But 'revered'? That is quite a leap.
Ms Sackman, who was on wearisomely partisan form, trilled away about how non-jury trials would be quicker and more efficient. Down my neck ran a chill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Cash use to be tracked amid ‘two-tier society' fears
The Bank of England will monitor the use of cash payments amid fears that vulnerable groups risk being excluded in a 'two-tier society'. Threadneedle Street officials are set to intervene after MPs warned more checks were needed to ensure people can still pay with cash in public places, such as coffee shops, leisure centres and on public transport. There are currently no legal requirements in the UK for businesses or organisations to accept cash, fuelling fears that pensioners and people with disabilities could be shut out. Dame Meg Hillier, chair of the Treasury select committee, welcomed the move by the Bank and said it was a 'positive first step'. It comes after the committee revealed earlier this year that vulnerable groups were having to pay higher prices for essential goods amid an increase in the number of shops not accepting cash. However, it also said there were significant obstacles in assessing the true level of cash acceptance across the UK. A study by Link, the UK's cash machine network, in 2024 found that half of those surveyed had been to a business or organisation in the last eight weeks that did not accept cash or discouraged cash use. Yet 98pc of small businesses said they accepted cash when polled by Savanta. A lack of consistent evidence makes it challenging for the Government to determine how widespread the issue of cash acceptance is in the UK. There are concerns that a decline in cash acceptance will lead to the exclusion of vulnerable groups such as the elderly, people with learning disabilities, and domestic abuse victims. Dame Meg said that the Government 'consistently agrees' with the Treasury committee's view 'that action needs to be taken to avoid financially excluding vulnerable groups'. In response to the committee's findings, Emma Reynolds, the economic secretary to the Treasury, said: 'Ensuring individuals have access to the appropriate financial products and services they need is a key priority for the Government.' The Treasury is due to publish a financial inclusion strategy later this year, 'which will examine the barriers consumers face to accessing products and what more industry and government can do to support them'. ATM decline When appearing before the Treasury committee in January, Ms Reynolds said the Government had 'no plans to regulate businesses, big or small, to compel them to accept cash'. Yet the committee has argued that ministers may have to legally mandate cash acceptance in the future if a 'two-tier society' arises. Worries of a decline in cash acceptance have emerged alongside a significant fall in the number of free ATMs. The number of cash machines in the UK fell by 5pc year-on-year to 46,182 in 2024, according to Link. Since the pandemic, there has been a rise in the number of businesses that call themselves cash-free, with others stating that they prefer customers to accept card or contactless payments. Over the last decade, there has also been a significant decline in the number of cash transactions. Cash accounted for just over half of all payments in 2013, but that fell to 12pc in 2023 as the popularity of card and digital payments increased. Blackouts in Spain and Portugal earlier this year prevented the public from making card payments. The committee highlighted the importance of physical cash in emergency situations, warning that alternatives must be in place in the event of a major technological failure or a state-sponsored cyber attack.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Britain is broke: how inflation-linked debt costs us £60bn
Britain is broke. That was the depressing conclusion of the Office for Budget Responsibility's annual report on the future of the public finances published this week. Of course the fiscal watchdog did not choose those exact words. Instead it used 65,000 other words, but if you were to distil the overall message, it's hard to come to a different conclusion. The watchdog chose to focus its report this year on the ruinous cost of the triple-lock pension promise and the strain that net zero will place on the public purse. But in Westminster, all the talk is about how a little-known policy decision made decades ago is putting the government in an uncomfortably tight fiscal straitjacket. That decision was to start promising investors who lent money to the government that their cash would be protected from the ravages of inflation. Or in more technical language, the government started issuing index-linked gilts that were tied to the retail prices index (RPI) measure of inflation. This innovation meant investors could lend the government money safe in the knowledge that if inflation rose, the amount of interest they would receive and the amount returned at the end of the term of the loan would rise so the real value of their investment would never fall. Conventional gilts offer no such protection. The lender is just paid a fixed amount of interest each year, and a fixed amount of cash is returned at the end of the term. The consequences of this policy for the public purse are only now beginning to be felt because of the higher levels of inflation since the pandemic. The numbers are stark. In 2020 the government spent £25 billion a year on debt interest, but in the last tax year it spent £105 billion. By comparison, it spends £60 billion on schools, £55 billion on defence and £20 billion on the police. So who is to blame and how did we get here? The short answer is politicians. The long answer is more complicated. Decisions on the type of debt to issue each year are made by the chancellor but they are informed by officials and subject the demands of the market. The record shows that particularly high levels of index-linked gilts were issued under the chancellorships of Gordon Brown and George Osborne. However, the policy itself was first introduced by Geoffrey Howe, who was chancellor in 1981. Howe made the decision in part because the early Thatcher government was struggling to borrow what it needed after the economic crises of the 1970s, but also because it signalled that the Treasury was serious about cracking down on inflation. By promising to protect the real value of money lent to the Treasury, investors were reassured that the new government would not repeat the reckless and inflationary policies of the previous decade. There was also strong demand for this type of government debt from the pensions industry because it helped to fund the inflation guarantees in final salary schemes. • OBR rings alarm on pensions, climate change and the fiscal rule In the decades that followed, index-linked gilts, or 'linkers' as they became known, were hailed as a clever innovation because they met this demand and actually saved the government money. The reason was that investors would accept a lower rate of return on index-linked loans than conventional gilts because of the inflation protection they offered. Provided the RPI rate remained low — and over the next few decades it generally did — the government benefited by having to pay less interest on its debts. Indeed, an official analysis in 2023 found that the Treasury cumulatively saved £158 billion by issuing linkers in place of conventional gilts between 1981 and 2022. However, the equation dramatically shifted in 2022 when inflation surged to a high of 14.2 per cent. Suddenly, the amount the government had to pay to service its debts ballooned. Britain's public finances were hit uniquely hard because over the preceding decades the UK government had issued so much more index-linked debt than anyone else. By 2022, nearly 25 per cent of Britain's outstanding borrowing was index-lined, more than twice as much as any other G7 country. Italy has the next highest holding at 12 per cent but US debt has only 7 per cent and Germany less than 5 per cent. This meant that between 2019 and 2022, debt interest costs increased faster in the UK than in every other OECD country. The proportion of this increase that is down to linkers is subject to debate because the pandemic greatly increased government borrowing generally and the interest rates on conventional gilts also increased. However, an analysis by The Times of RPI rates and the stock of outstanding government debt, suggests the decision to issue linkers over conventional gilts cost the Treasury £62.8 billion in higher interest payments during 2022 and 2023. To put this in perspective, a penny on income tax raises only about £6 billion. These higher borrowing costs are set to continue for years to come as linkers mature and are repaid. It is one of the main reasons why the annual bill for servicing the nation's debt is set to hit £132 billion by 2030, according to the OBR. Whatever the exact cost of linkers, there can be no doubt that they have severely constrained Rachel Reeves's ability to enact meaningful policy, or borrow to invest in Britain's creaking public services. To make matters worse for the chancellor, investors in the gilt markets are acutely aware of the government's inflation-based debt problem so they scrutinise her every policy decision. Any move that suggests Labour might abandon fiscal responsibility rapidly raises the interest rates they demand to lend to the government. That is a major problem when the Treasury needs to borrow more than £250 billion this year and why these investors have been nicknamed the 'bond vigilantes'. The bond market really is an ever-present sword of Damocles hanging over the government. Anyone who doubts its power should remind themselves what happened to Liz Truss following her disastrous mini-budget. Perhaps understandably, no one is jumping to the front of the queue to take the blame for creating this situation. A Treasury source said that successive chancellors had to decide between the 'short-term attraction' of index-linked gilts and the longer-term risk. The 'red hot' demand from the pension industry made those decisions harder. However, the source admitted that, in hindsight, the issuing of index-linked gilts 'went too far'. While no politicians have publicly blamed the officials who advised them, questions have been asked about the role of civil servants. The principal official responsible for advising the government through the Brown and Osborne period was Sir Robert Stheeman, who was chief executive of the Debt Management Office (DMO), a Treasury agency created in 1998 when the Bank of England became independent. The DMO took on the bank's role of issuing and servicing gilts, with an objective to 'minimise financing costs over the long term, taking account of risk'. While there is no public record of Stheeman, who was earning £145,000 a year when he left in 2024, explicitly calling for more linkers, he did repeatedly describe them as a 'key part of the UK financing programme' and emphasised their cost advantages under certain market conditions. Last year, his replacement, Jessica Pulay, noted the markets' robust demand for index-linked gilts. However, ascribing any blame to officials at the DMO is tricky because they have no decision-making role and are only there to advise and execute government orders. So as successive chancellors were making merry in the bond markets, drunk on the illusion that inflation was a historic problem, did anyone raise the alarm? The short answer is very few. There were some warnings but they were muted. For example, in the mid 2010s, the House of Lords economic affairs committee highlighted that the UK's large share of inflation-linked debt made the public finances unusually vulnerable to inflation shocks — however it was presented only as a theoretical risk. Given the extended period of low inflation the country had benefited from, few took much notice. It was only when the OBR raised the alarm in 2017 that the Treasury decided to act. In the 2018 budget, Philip Hammond announced the government would gradually reduce the proportion of index-linked gilts it issued. Over the next five years, the share of government borrowing raised using linkers fell from 23.5 per cent to 12.4 per cent. However, it was too little, too late. Decades of much higher levels of issuance, and the fact that the inflation uplift on these debts kept their value rising, meant that by 2022, when inflation surged, more than 25 per cent of all outstanding gilts were still index linked. Rumours in Westminster suggest that for years the Treasury did not want to address the risks because linkers were considered a useful tool to constrain excessive departmental spending and the profligacy of No 10. The theory is that having a high proportion of index-linked gilts meant that large increases in public spending would be inflationary and therefore prohibitively expensive. Whether that theory is true, remains to be seen. However, what cannot be disputed is that Britain's debt experiment will handicap chancellors for years to come.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Have YOU got a story? Email: poppy.gibson@mailonline.co.uk
A firefighter was attacked during a night of bonfires across Northern Ireland ahead of the annual Orange Order parades. The emergency service worker was attacked while attending a bonfire in Lisburn, eight miles outside Belfast but was uninjured and remained on duty. The incident occurred on Friday as tens of thousands prepared to take to the streets across the region for the traditional celebrations on Saturday. As part of the festivities effigies of rap trio Kneecap were set alight and Irish flags were burned on pyres along with 300 other bonfires in loyalist neighbourhoods across the region on Thursday and Friday nights. It comes after widespread condemnation of the celebrations after effigies of migrants in a boat were burned on a bonfire in Moygashel, County Tyrone on Thursday. Bonfires raged across the country to mark the 334th anniversary of the Battle of the Boyne where the Protestant King William of Orange triumphed over the Catholic King James II. Effigies burned ahead of this year's parades included the controversial Irish band Kneecap with signs placed on pyres reading 'Kill Your Local Kneecap' - seemingly a response to a clip that emerged from a gig in 2023 that appeared to show a member telling people to murder their MP. Elsewhere, posters depicting the Irish rap group Kneecap, Irish flags and Palestinian flags appeared on other bonfires on Friday evening. Effigies of the band members were placed on a pyre in south Belfast, as well as a sign written in the Irish language. The depictions of Kneecap come after the Police Service of Northern Ireland said they were investigating a hate incident in relation to a fire which featured life-sized effigies of a migrants in a dinghy, wearing life jackets. Below the boat were several placards, one saying: 'Stop the boats', and another saying: 'Veterans before refugees.' In recent years, the Moygashel bonfires have come under scrutiny for their controversial displays which have seen them venture into politics and contentious cultural points. Last year a mock police car was burnt on the top of the bonfire and in 2023 a boat designed to represent the post-Brexit Irish Sea economic border was torched. Meanwhile the most contentious bonfire was located on a site containing asbestos and close to an electricity sub station off the Donegall Road in south Belfast. The PSNI said on Thursday that the force would not agree to a request from Belfast City Council to remove the pyre on the site off the Donegall Road. The police force along with members of the legislative assembly encouraged the public to stay away from the site on health and safety grounds. However the Grand Secretary of the Orange Order Rev Mervyn Gibson said people should 'go and enjoy themselves' at the bonfire. He told the BBC that a council committee vote earlier this week to remove the bonfire was a 'political decision'. A pyre set alight at Meridi Street, off the Donegall Road in Belfast as part of the Twelfth commemorations marking the anniversary of the Protestant King William's victory over the Catholic King James at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 The Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service (NIFRS) said it dealt with 72 bonfire related incidents across Friday evening. One firefighter was attacked while attending a bonfire in Lisburn, Co Antrim. NIFRS area commander Andy Burns said: 'Between 6pm 11 July and 2am 12 July 2025, we received 277 emergency 999 calls. 'This resulted in our firefighters attending 194 operational incidents, 72 of which were bonfire related. Peak activity was between 10pm and 1am. 'During this period, the number of emergency calls received increased by 154% when compared to 2024. 'It was a challenging and extremely busy night for NIFRS with an increase in demand for our regional control centre and emergency response.' The spokesperson added: 'Disappointingly, a firefighter was attacked while attending a bonfire in Lisburn. They were not injured and remained on duty. 'This was an isolated incident and not reflective of the support shown to firefighters in carrying out their duties across the evening.' The Police Service of Northern Ireland said they were investigating a hate incident in relation to a fire which featured life-sized effigies of a migrants in a dinghy, wearing life jackets Of all the loyal order parades to take place on Saturday, around 30 have been officially categorised as sensitive by the Parades Commission. Locations of sensitive parades this year include Belfast, Coleraine, Keady, Dunloy, Rasharkin, Strabane, Newtownabbey, Maghera, Newtownbutler, Portadown, Glengormley and Bellaghy. More than 4,000 police officers and police staff will be working on July 12. On the 11th night, around 1,200 officers were deployed to monitor public safety at bonfires. The cost of policing parades and bonfires in Northern Ireland through spring and summer was £6.1 million last year, a figure that was up £1.5 million on the previous year. The bill, which covers the period April 1 to August 31, also includes the cost of policing republican commemorations around Easter and events to mark the mid-August anniversary of the introduction of internment without trial during the Troubles. The PSNI expects the costs in 2025 to be higher still. This is due to falling police numbers and the resultant increased reliance on paying overtime to ensure enough officers are on duty for the events. Chief Constable Jon Boutcher has urged mutual respect in the marking of events. He said: 'Our officers will be on the ground throughout the weekend, working in partnership with community leaders, event organisers, and local representatives to support lawful, peaceful, and family-friendly events. However where necessary, we will take firm and proportionate action to keep people safe. 'Our priority remains the safety and wellbeing of everyone.' On Sunday morning, an Orange Order parade has been permitted to pass Ardoyne shops in north Belfast restricted to one band and 50 members of the order. It is a return parade at a former flashpoint which traditionally took place on the evening of July 12 often resulting in violent scenes. Meanwhile, the traditional July 13 events organised by the Royal Black Preceptory in the village of Scarva, Co Armagh will take place on Monday.
