Rishi Sunak has been criticized for being disconnected from reality after making a wager of £1,000 with Piers Morgan on the likelihood of deportation flights to Rwanda occurring before the upcoming election.
Morgan, speaking on TalkTV, offered the prime minister a wager of £1,000 to be donated to a refugee charity if he could not fulfill the task of getting individuals on the planes before the election. He asked the prime minister if he would accept the bet.
Sunak and Morgan shook hands on their bet and Sunak stated that he was diligently working to ensure that the people on the planes were taken care of.
The government’s effort to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda for their appeals to be reviewed has been rejected by the highest court, which deemed the policy illegal in November. Sunak has stated that he may be able to rescue the plan.
Opposition parties criticised his decision to agree to the bet with Morgan. The shadow paymaster general, Jonathan Ashworth, said: “Not a lot of people facing rising mortgages, bills and food prices are casually dropping £1,000 bets. It just shows that Rishi Sunak is totally out of touch with working people.”
The opposition’s spokesperson for immigration, Stephen Kinnock, expressed disapproval of the wager, stating that it was “highly offensive.” He also criticized Sunak for recklessly spending money as if it were just a game, betting on a policy that he can no longer manage.
The Scottish National party filed a report against Sunak to the independent adviser on ministers’ interests, Laurie Magnus, stating that his bet may violate the ministerial code. Kirsty Blackman expressed her disapproval, stating that it is disgraceful and appalling for Rishi Sunak, one of the wealthiest individuals in the UK, to gamble on the timely deportation of vulnerable refugees before the election.
Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament Alistair Carmichael brought up a matter of procedure in the House of Commons, stating that Sunak should disclose his wager on his declaration of interests.
The spokesperson for the prime minister stated that Piers suggested it, and based on the response, we can expect to see flights taking off.
Sunak received additional backlash for stating that “the evidence speaks for itself” in response to being questioned about his belief in Keir Starmer being a supporter of terrorism.
The prime minister claimed that in 2008, Starmer acted as a representative for Hizb ut-Tahrir while the group was pushing back against a ban on their actions in Germany. Last month, the UK government officially labeled Hizb ut-Tahrir as a terrorist organization.
He acted as their attorney during their efforts to oppose this. We have recently banned them because we believe that is their nature. These actions reflect people’s beliefs.
A representative from Starmer’s team disregarded the assault as “frantic nonsense”.
The spokesperson stated that Keir Starmer led the initial prosecution of high-ranking individuals from al-Qaida, the imprisonment of those involved in the airline liquid bomb plot, and the removal of numerous terrorists from the country.
“Under Keir’s guidance, there was an increase in the success rates of charging and convicting individuals for sexual offenses, victims received improved support, and the Crown Prosecution Service underwent significant reforms. The prime minister can only aspire to have such a notable track record of serving their country.”
Sunak and other members of the Conservative Party have consistently criticized Starmer for his previous collaboration with Hizb ut-Tahrir in 2008, just before he took on the role of director of public prosecutions. Starmer was a member of a group of lawyers who applied to the European court of human rights in June 2008 to contest a prohibition on the organization’s actions in Germany. However, their appeal was ultimately denied.
According to a Labour representative, Starmer did not personally represent the organization in court. However, he was part of a three-member team that filed an initial application to Strasbourg. The type of legal work involved in this case includes representing and advising individuals regardless of their beliefs.
In January, during prime minister’s questions, Sunak brought up the topic of the government’s decision to ban the group for their support of terrorism and endorsement of the 7 October attacks on Israel.
Source: theguardian.com
