Section:GDN 1N PaGe:8 Edition Date:190907 Edition:01 Zone: Sent at 6/9/2019 16:50 cYanmaGentaYellowbla
- The Guardian Saturday 7 September 2019
(^8) National
Politics
Police chief voices
dismay over PM’s
partisan speech
Matthew Weaver
Kate Proctor
Peter Walker
West Yorkshire police have criticised
Boris Johnson for making a political
speech before a backdrop of its offi cers,
with the chief constable saying the
force was assured this would not
happen but that Downing Street
changed its plans at the last minute.
The prime minister faced wide-
spread condemnation for seeming to
abuse the impartiality of police offi cers
by making partisan comments about
Brexit and an election at a police
training college in Wakefi eld, West
Yorkshire, with officers lined up
behind him.
In a statement released yesterday,
West Yorkshire police said the visit
was meant to have four stages: tour-
ing the mounted section; an informal
chat with new student offi cers; a fi ve-
minute speech about plans to recruit
20,000 new offi cers ; and a longer
address at the National Police Air
Service (NPAS) base at the same site,
without any offi cers present.
The chief constable, John Robins,
said minutes before the fi rst speech
the force was told that the NPAS visit
had been cancelled.
“I was therefore disappointed to see
my police offi cers as a backdrop to the
part of the speech that was not related
to recruitment,” he said.
“ I am pleased that we were chosen
as the focal point of the national
recruitment campaign launch, but
the good news of extra offi cers was
overshadowed by the media cover-
age of other events.
“It was the understanding of West
Yorkshire police that any involvement
of our offi cers was solely about police
offi cer recruitment. We had no prior
knowledge that the speech would be
broadened to other issues until it was
delivered.”
Johnson’s speech was delayed by
almost an hour, with offi cers made to
wait standing in the sun. Near the end
of the sometimes rambling speech , an
offi cer behind the prime minister had
to sit down after feeling faint.
The shadow policing minister,
Louise Haigh , wrote to the Cabinet
Offi ce asking why the police had been
used for a highly political speech.
“Not only was the precious time
of these offi cers wasted, either by
diverting them from their duties or
depriving them of much-needed rest,
but through no fault of their own they
were put in an intolerable position by
the nakedly party -political direction
the event took,” Haigh wrote. “Police
regulations are clear that they are
strictly non-party political and can-
not give the perception of such.”
The Police Federation of England
and Wales also criticised the event.
“I am surprised that police offi cers
were used as a backdrop for a political
speech in this way,” said John Apter ,
the organisation’s national chair. “I am
sure that on refl ection all concerned
will agree that this was the wrong
decision. ”
A No 10 spokeswoman said: “The
PM’s long-planned visit was highlight-
ing a national recruitment campaign
for 20,000 new offi cers, which has
been welcomed across the police
service. It gave the PM the opportu-
nity to see fi rst-hand the outstanding
training which new recruits receive,
and to meet those who have commit-
ted their lives to keeping us safe.”
The West Yorkshire police and
crime commissioner , Mark Burns-
Williamson , called on Johnson to
apologise. “To use police officers
as the backdrop to what became a
political speech was inappropriate
and they shouldn’t have been put in
that position. It clearly turned into a
rant about Brexit, the opposition and
a potential general election. There’s
no way that police offi cers should have
formed the backdrop to a speech of
that nature.”
Labour’s Yvette Cooper , the chair
of the home aff airs select committee,
said: “For Boris Johnson to make so
many police stop their training and
work to be part of his political stunt is
an abuse of power. ”
‘ I was disap-
pointed to see
my offi cers as
a backdrop
to the part of
the speech
not related to
recruitment ’
John Robins
Chief constable
Prorogation
Miller plans
to appeal
after judges
reject case
Law reform
Plea to push
through
domestic
abuse bill
Owen Bowcott
Legal aff airs correspondent
The legal campaigner Gina Miller
has vowed to continue her “fi ght for
democracy” after the high court in
London ruled yesterday that Boris
Johnson’s decision to prorogue
parliament for fi ve weeks was legal.
Three of the most senior judges
in England and Wales dismissed her
claim that the prime minister had
acted unlawfully in giving advice to
the Queen to suspend parliament
from next week at a time of momen-
tous political upheaval.
The lord chief justice, Lord Burnett
of Maldon , the master of the rolls, Sir
Terence Etherton , and the president
of the Queen’s bench division, Dame
Victoria Sharp , granted permission for
an appeal to the supreme court.
They gave no reasons for their deci-
sion, which is likely to be released next
week. Sir James Eadie QC, for the prime
minister, had argued it was a purely
political decision that should not be
subject to challenge in the courts.
Earlier this week, a Scottish court
turned down a similar legal challenge.
In Edinburgh, the inner house of the
court of session has reserved until next
Wednesday a decision on an initial
appeal over the legality of Johnson’s
prorogation advice.
The court has also delayed until the
same day any ruling about granting an
interdict, or injunction, temporarily
preventing the government’s suspen-
sion of parliament.
A third claim seeking to overturn
the prime minister’s decision to pro-
rogue parliament until 14 October was
being heard in Belfast yesterday. Law-
yers for the victims’ rights campaigner
Raymond McCord told the high court
that a no-deal Brexit would create
chaos for Northern Ireland.
All three claims are likely to go
to appeal and will be combined
for a joint hearing expected at the
supreme court for three days starting
on 17 September.
Prorogation has never lasted longer
than three weeks in the past 40 years
and in most cases was only for a week
or less, the London court was told.
During Thursday’s hearing, Lord
Pannick QC, representing Miller,
described the prime minister’s deci-
sion as an “unlawful abuse of power”.
Speaking afterwards , Miller said
she would fi ght on. “We are very dis-
appointed with the judgment today.
We feel strongly that parliamentary
sovereignty is fundamental to the sta-
bility and future of our country and is
therefore worth fi ghting to defend. As
our politics becomes more chaotic on
a daily basis, the more vital it is that
parliament is sitting.
“We are therefore pleased that
the judges have given permission to
appeal to the supreme court on the
grounds that our case has merit.
“All of us here today, my legal team
who have worked tirelessly over the
last few weeks, and I, feel we have
no other option but to appeal this
judgment to the supreme court. An
appeal ‘leapfrog’ date has been set for
17 September.
“Today we stood up for everyone
- we stood up for future generations,
we stood up for our representative
democracy, and tried to stop those
who would wreck our constitution.
“To give up now would be a der-
eliction of our responsibility to help
protect our elected representatives - our eyes and ears that sit in West-
minster – who protect our rights and
give each of us a voice.
“It is not right that they should be
bullied or shut down – especially at this
most momentous of times in the his-
tory of our United Kingdom. My legal
team and I will not give up the fi ght
for democracy.”
▲ Gina Miller said she would fi ght on
‘for democracy’ after the high court
ruled prorogation was legal
PHOTOGRAPH: AARON CHOWN/PA MEDIAFrances PerraudinThe government must not allow the
prorogation of parliament to further
delay the introduction of new domes-
tic abuse laws, campaigners have said,
arguing that survivors cannot wait any
longer for “critical protections and
support”.
Attempts to improve the laws
relating to domestic abuse have had
numerous set backs in recent years.
Proposed reforms to prevent perpe-
trators cross-examining victims in the
family courts were initially included
in the prisons and courts bill 2017,
which was abandoned when Theresa
May called the 2017 general election.
A range of measures were then
included in the domestic abuse bill,
which was fi nally introduced to par-
liament in July this year. Charities and
campaigners have now sought assur-
ances that the legislation will not be
dropped again in the current politi-
cal turmoil.
In a letter to the prime minister
leading domestic abuse charities,
academics and human rights organ-
isations called for the government to
make a clear public commitment to
deliver the bill within the next parlia-
mentary session.
“We are writing to seek assurance
that vital legislation to protect sur-
vivors of domestic abuse remains
a priority for the government. The
domestic abuse bill is a pivotal
moment,” the letter read.RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws