Farage condemned as ‘Putin-loving, free speech impostor and Trump sycophant’ by ranking Democrat on House judiciary committee
Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the House judiciary committee, says they do have free speech in the UK. He says Keir Starmer has not shut down GB News, even though Farage has a show on that station in which he criticises the government and calls for bans on peaceful protests.
He says Farage is able to parrot “Putin’s absurd talking points” on TV. He goes on:
For a man who fancies himself to some kind of a free speech martyr, Mr Farage seems most at home with the autocrats and dictators of the world who are crushing freedom on earth.
He says Farage wants to get rid of the Online Safety Act. But if he wants to do that, he should be advancing those arguments in the UK parliament, which is meeting today, Raskin says.
He goes on:
To the people of the UK who think this Putin-loving, free speech impostor and Trump sycophant will protect freedom in your country, come over to America and see what Trump and Mega are doing to destroy our freedom, kidnap college students off the street, ban books from our libraries, militarise our police and unleash them against our communities, take over our universities … You might think twice before you let Mr Farage “make Britain great again”.
Key events
-
Farage urges US politicians to tell UK government it’s ‘got this wrong’ on Online Safety Act
-
Farage condemned as ‘Putin-loving, free speech impostor and Trump sycophant’ by ranking Democrat on House judiciary committee
-
Ed Davey backs Rayner, saying as fellow parent of disabled child he accepts she was prioritising her son’s care needs
-
Farage denies encouraging US to use threat of tariffs to change UK online safety policy
-
Nigel Farage to give evidence to Congress about free speech in UK
-
Badenoch calls for Rayner to be sacked
-
No 10 won’t say if Rayner will have to resign if ethics adviser says she has broken ministerial code
-
No 10 won’t say when Starmer was told Rayner realised she had underpaid stamp duty
-
PMQs – snap verdict
-
Met police chief says police have been placed in ‘impossible position’ by ambiguity in hate laws
-
Starmer says Zack Polanski has made ‘strange comments about women’, in jibe at breast enlargement hypnotherapy incident
-
Starmer says it’s ‘disgrace’ that Farage has gone to US to lobby for sanctions on UK that would harm working people
-
Starmer rules out withdrawing from ECHR
-
Starmer says there is ‘man-made famine’ in Gaza, and it’s ‘horrifying’
-
Starmer defends Rayner, saying he is ‘proud’ to sit beside working class woman who became deputy PM
-
Rayner says she discussed question of resigning with family after stamp duty error
-
Rayner sidesteps questions about whether she can stay on as minister, saying she is ‘in shock’ about stamp duty error
-
Starmer faces Badenoch at PMQs
-
Reeves says economy ‘not working well enough for working people’
-
Angela Rayner admits underpaying stamp duty on £800,000 seaside flat
-
Majority of Labour party members would back digital ID card scheme, poll suggests
-
Lib Dems urge Badenoch to expel Liz Truss from Tory party after she calls for Trump-style ‘revolution’ in UK
-
Under-16s in England to be banned from buying energy drinks
-
Streeting suggests hate speech laws should be revised, saying they have had ‘unintended consequences’
-
Autumn budget to take place on 26 November, Treasury announces
-
Nigel Farage to testify about Online Safety Act at US House of Representatives
Back at the House judiciary committee, Farage is talking about hate speech laws in the UK. The police have to interpret these laws, he says. He say just today the head of the Metropolitan police has called for hate speech laws to be clarified. (See 12.45pm.)
But the situation may get worse, he claims, because the government wants to adopt a definition of Islamphobia.
Farage claims that this could lead to mocking religion becoming illegal.
On abortion laws, Farage also confirms that the law can prevent people praying outside abortion clinics.
(He does not explain that these abortion buffer zone laws are designed to stop users of abortion clinics being intimidated; it is not praying per se that is problematic, but the impact a protest of that kind may have on women seeking an abortion.)
Ben Quinn
Ben Quinn is a senior Guardian reporter.
A Reform UK official involved in managing donations to the party has been accused of sharing posts by far-right activists online and promoting other extreme content.
James Catton started working in in May for Reform UK and identifies himself on Linked in as a “donor manager’ who works closely with its senior leadership team, which includes Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuf.
A now-deleted account on X (formerly Twitter), in Catton’s name, shared a number of posts endorsing “remigration” (a far-right concept of ethnic cleansing, involving the deportation of migrants and/or non-white citizens) and promoted content from a variety of far-right extremists.
It also promoted content by the extreme anti-Muslim political party Britain First, as well as its co-leaders Ashlea Simon and Paul Golding.
Hope not Hate, the anti extremism campaign group which identified the posts, said Catton was the latest example of a Reform UK staffer who has promoted extreme views on social media. The account was deleted after Catton was approached.
“While the party wants to portray itself as respectable, professional, and serious about vetting, its employment of Catton shows it still has a very long way to go,” said Joe Mulhall, director of research at Hope not Hate.
Reform UK has been approached for comment.
Farage, and the other witnesses, are now taking questions.
Darrell Issa, a Republican, asks Farage to confirm that the UK does not have a constitutional right to free speech, equivalent to the US first amendment.
Farage confirms that is right.
But he says until Covid there was no debate about threats to free speech in the UK. With Covid, that changed, he claims.
Farage urges US politicians to tell UK government it’s ‘got this wrong’ on Online Safety Act
At the committee Nigel Farage is speaking now.
He starts with a jibe about Jamie Raskin’s “delightful” introduction to him.
He says he accepts parents are concerned about what their children access online.
He thinks hardware changes might be the solution.
But instead the UK has gone down an “awful, authoritarian” direction, he says.
He says JD Vance did everyone a service by criticising Europe’s record on free speech at the Munich security conference.
He says Lucy Connolly put out an “intemperate” tweet last year. She was sentenced to 31 months in jail. She is now out. Farage said he wanted to bring her with him to Washington, but he could not because of the restrictions she is under.
(She posted a message on social media saying about asylum seeker saying “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”.)
And he turns to the arrest of Graham Linehan.
He was arrested at Heathrow for tweets posted months before, Farage says. And he was not even a British citizen; he is Irish. The same thing could happen to Americans at Heathrow, he suggests.
This could happen to any American man or woman that goes to Heathrow that has said things online that the British government and British police don’t like. It is a potentially big threat to tech bosses, to many, many others.
He says the Online Safety Act could damage trade between the US and the UK, and threaten free speech. He goes on:
So I’ve come today, as well to be a klaxon, to say to you, don’t allow, piece by piece, this to happen here in America. You will be doing us and yourselves and all freedom-loving people a favour if your politicians and your businesses said to the British government, you’ve simply got this wrong.
At what point did we become North Korea? Well, I think the Irish comedy writer found that out two days ago at Heathrow Airport.
This is a genuinely worrying, concerning and shocking situation, and I thank you for the opportunity to come here today.
Farage was referencing today’s Daily Mail splash.
Farage condemned as ‘Putin-loving, free speech impostor and Trump sycophant’ by ranking Democrat on House judiciary committee
Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the House judiciary committee, says they do have free speech in the UK. He says Keir Starmer has not shut down GB News, even though Farage has a show on that station in which he criticises the government and calls for bans on peaceful protests.
He says Farage is able to parrot “Putin’s absurd talking points” on TV. He goes on:
For a man who fancies himself to some kind of a free speech martyr, Mr Farage seems most at home with the autocrats and dictators of the world who are crushing freedom on earth.
He says Farage wants to get rid of the Online Safety Act. But if he wants to do that, he should be advancing those arguments in the UK parliament, which is meeting today, Raskin says.
He goes on:
To the people of the UK who think this Putin-loving, free speech impostor and Trump sycophant will protect freedom in your country, come over to America and see what Trump and Mega are doing to destroy our freedom, kidnap college students off the street, ban books from our libraries, militarise our police and unleash them against our communities, take over our universities … You might think twice before you let Mr Farage “make Britain great again”.
The House judiciary committee hearing has started. But we have not heard from Nigel Farage yet.
Congressional committee hearings in the US are not like select committee hearings in London. Committee members are allowed to make lengthy statements, and the first five minutes or so was taken up with a long speech by Jim Jordan, the Republican committee chair. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat, is speaking now.
Ed Davey backs Rayner, saying as fellow parent of disabled child he accepts she was prioritising her son’s care needs
The Lib Dem leader Ed Davey has issued a statement supporting Angela Rayner in the controversy about her underpaying stamp duty. Like Rayner, Davey has a disabled child, and he says he is prepared to accept that in this case Rayner was acting in the best interests of her son.
(Rayner did not pay the full stamp duty owed when she bought a flat in Hove because, having put her stake in her previous family home in a trust on behalf of her son, she thought that it no longer counted as her property for stamp duty purposes.)
Davey said:
I understand it is normally the role of opposition leaders to jump up and down and call for resignations – as we’ve seen plenty of from the Conservatives already.
Obviously if the ethics advisor says Angela Rayner has broken the rules, her position may well become untenable.
But as a parent of a disabled child, I know the thing my wife and I worry most about is our son’s care after we have gone, so I can completely understand and trust that the deputy prime minister was thinking about the same thing here.
Perhaps now is a good time to talk about how we look after disabled people and how we can build a more caring country.
Farage denies encouraging US to use threat of tariffs to change UK online safety policy
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, has rejected claims that he is encouraging the US to use the threat of tariffs against the UK as a means of protecting American tech companies from British internet safety laws.
Keir Starmer made this claim at PMQs (see 12.25pm), based on a Sun report about the written evidence that Farage has submitted to the House judiciary committee (see 9.15am).
In an interview with Sky News, Farage claimed that he had “not suggested that [tariffs] for one moment”. He had not used that word, he said. He claimed Starmer had misinterpreted his views.
Nigel Farage to give evidence to Congress about free speech in UK
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, is about to give evidence to the House judiciary committee on “Europe’s Threat to American Speech and Innovation”. (See 9.15am.) There is a live feed here.
Dan Neidle, the tax expert and campaigner, has posted these on Bluesky about Angela Rayner’s situation.
Here’s the thing. If you’re buying a house and everything is simple, you can ask your conveyancer how much stamp duty to pay.
If things are complex – e.g. there’s a trust – this is a very bad idea.
If Ms Rayner just asked her conveyancer then that was a mistake.
If she asked her conveyancer and didn’t mention a trust, then fair to blame Ms Rayner.
If she asked her conveyancer, mentioned her trust, and the conveyancer tried to advice on an area outside their expertise, then the conveyancer was an idiot
And he has also posted this explainer about how tax avoidance becomes tax evasion.
What’s the difference between tax avoidance, tax non-compliance and tax evasion?
This.
Likely Ms Rayner is in category 4 – “non-compliant”.
If she took and followed appropriate advice she owes tax plus interest. If she didn’t, she was probably “careless” and also owes penalties.
Badenoch calls for Rayner to be sacked
Kemi Badenoch has posted a message on social media restating her call at PMQs for Angela Rayner to be sacked.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson rejected suggestions that Keir Starmer misled the public in an interview with Radio 5 Live on Monday when he said that anyone briefing against Angela Rayner was making a mistake.
Asked if Starmer’s answer was misleading, the spokesperson replied: “No.”
The suggestion was that Starmer was categorically saying that those questioning Rayner’s account at the time of her tax arrangements were wrong.
But, in fact, in the interview Starmer seemed to be making a more general point about how in the past Rayner has seen off people who have briefed against her. He said:
Angela has had people briefing against her and talking her down over and over again. It’s a big mistake, by the way. Angela is an incredible [deputy] prime minister.
No 10 won’t say if Rayner will have to resign if ethics adviser says she has broken ministerial code
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson also ducked most questions about the inquiry into Angela Rayner not paying the right amount of stamp duty that will be carried out by Sir Laurie Magnus, the No 10 ethics adviser.
Asked what the terms of reference would be, the spokesperson said that was “up to the independent adviser to determine”.
Asked how long the inquiry would take, the spokesperson said that was up to Magnus.
Asked if Rayner would have to resign if Magnus says she broke the ministerial code, the spokesperson replied:
As you’d expect, we’re not going to get ahead of the process.
As she’s set out in her statement today, she’s referred herself to the independent adviser. She will provide him with her fullest co-operation and access to all the information he requires.
It is now up to the independent adviser to conduct that process.
The independent adviser will advise the prime minister on next steps. He will provide information to the prime minister as part of that process. But I’m not going to get ahead of that.
No 10 won’t say when Starmer was told Rayner realised she had underpaid stamp duty
Downing Street declined to say when Keir Starmer was told about Angela Rayner’s realisation that she had underpaid stamp duty on her second home, PA Media reports.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson referred reporters to Rayner’s statement when pressed on the timeline of when she found out she had not paid enough tax or informed her boss.
The spokesperson declined to say whether Starmer had seen the legal advice obtained by his deputy.
PMQs – snap verdict
Angela Rayner is unlikely to get moved or demoted over her stamp duty error. That is probably the key takeaway from PMQs. Keir Starmer cannot sack her as deputy Labour leader, a position to which she was elected by party members, but he could remove some or all of her ministerial positions, or she could resign herself. But judging by his very robust words defending her (see 12.05pm), Starmer is in no mood to take action against her. And, if Rayner was going to resign, she would have done so already. She won’t be quitting voluntarily after that PMQs.
We still don’t know what Sir Laurie Magnus, the PM’s ethics adviser, is going to conclude when he reports on this case, following Rayner’s decision to refer herself to him. But Magnus will have been watching PMQs just like the rest of us and, like all the Whitehall standards enforcers, he operates in a political context, sensitive to the concerns of his political boss. I may be wrong, but it hard to imagine that he will be demanding resignation-style sanctions on the basis of what we know so far.
Kemi Badenoch asked about Rayner in her opening question, but she did not pursue it and instead she stuck to a script about the economy. Should she have piled in more aggressively on the stamp duty story? Perhaps. But it is much easier to attack a minister who hasn’t admitted they have made a mistake than one who has, and the public are probably more sympathetic to Rayner than they would be to a lot of other ministers in this sort of predicament. Ultimately, the economy is what counts, and so Badenoch probably stuck to the right topic.
But she did not manage much more than a score-draw. I will beef up the earlier posts in the blog covering their exchanges with full quotes shortly, but it was a relatively routine ding-dong. Rather than focus on one particular issue, Badenoch tried various questions: why is government borrowing so high, will the self-employed pay more in tax, would a tax on pensions contributions be a tax on working people? None of it really landed. At times Starmer sounded under pressure – when he accuses her of talking the economy down, you always know he is on the defensive – but he mocked her effectively with his jibe about the Stanford story, and he came out quite unscathed.
The final question at PMQs came from John Hayes (Con), who asked Starmer to ensure that the union jack flag is flown on every public building.
Starmer said he shared Hayes’ pride in the national flag. “It belongs to all of us. We should be proud of it and value it,” he said.
Met police chief says police have been placed in ‘impossible position’ by ambiguity in hate laws
Jack Rankin (Con) asked Starmer about the Graham Linehan story.
Starmer said the Met have put out a statement about this this morning.
He said he had been clear he wanted the police to focus on the most serious issues.
There was a long history of free speech in this country, he said. He said he would “always defend it.”
Starmer was referring to this statement from Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan police commissioner. Rowley said this morning:
While the decision to investigate and ultimately arrest the man was made within existing legislation, which dictates that a threat to punch someone from a protected group could be an offence, I understand the concern caused by such incidents given differing perspectives on the balance between free speech and the risks of inciting violence in the real world.
Most reasonable people would agree that genuine threats of physical violence against an identified person or group should be acted upon by officers.
Such actions can and do have serious and violent real-world implications.
But when it comes to lesser cases, where there is ambiguity in terms of intent and harm, policing has been left between a rock and a hard place by successive governments, who have given officers no choice but to record such incidents as crimes when they’re reported.
Then they are obliged to follow all lines of inquiry and take action as appropriate.
I don’t believe we should be policing toxic culture wars debates and officers are currently in an impossible position.
Here is Vikram Dodd’s story about this.
#Farage #Putinloving #free #speech #impostor #Democrat #Reform #heads #speech #politics #live #Politics
