On Sky News, the veteran MP and the leader of the former Brexit Party had awkward exchanges over Reform UK’s apparent increasing influence.
Advertisement
The party has received more media coverage in recent weeks following its third place finishes in the Wellingborough and Kingswood by-elections – potentially splitting the Tory vote in future elections – and speculation over the possible defection of Anderson, who was suspended from the Tory parliamentary party after he refused to apologise for saying “Islamists” had “got control of (London mayor Sadiq) Khan and they’ve got control of London”.
The TV exchange got off to an uncomfortable start, with Hodge asking Tice not to “interrupt” her: “Let me put the argument and then I’ll give you plenty of time to respond.”
The former minister then took to task the argument that Reform UK is having an increasing influence on Westminster, pointing out that getting around 10% of the vote in by-elections pales compared to the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the 1980s: “I think the SDP were picking up much more. They were up at 23%. They never got a seat.”
She went on: “Your great, glorious president, whatever you would call him, he’s had more elections than I’ve had hot dinners and he’s managed to lose every single one.”
Advertisement
Margaret Hodge tears into Richard Tice(Reform UK);
“Don’t interrupt me… you came 3rd in the one election you stood in… & your great, glorious president or whatever you call him, he’s had more elections than I’ve had hot dinners, & lost every single one.. you’re no threat.” pic.twitter.com/IwQfBv2Fp7
They also clashed over Reform UK’s so-called “contract with you”, in effect a draft manifesto. Tice told Hodge “you clearly haven’t read the contract properly” and “you clearly don’t understand it”, which led to Hodge describing her opponent as “patronising” – and unleashing another attack.
Hello? Police? I’d like to report a murder.
Maybe trying to tell @margarethodge, a woman with 50 years political experience, minister for a decade, then chair of the Public Accounts C’tee, that she can’t read properly and doesn’t understand finance was not the best strategy. ~AA pic.twitter.com/T3ax6QzfbQ
They also went back-and-forth over policing of pro-Palestine protests, with Hodge accusing Tice of being “bloody patronising”.
She added: “Honestly, you really are. I feel a misogynist attack on me in the way (you say) ‘you’re so ill-informed. You don’t know what you’re talking about’. I find that really offensive.”
Liz Truss was today facing a backlash after she claimed that “woke” civil service culture “strays into antisemitism”.
The frontrunner in the race to replace Boris Johnson issued a press release vowing to protect Jews from “creeping antisemitism and wokeism”.
Advertisement
However, one part of the announcement, in which she launched an attack on civil servants, sparked fierce criticism.
Team Truss wrote: “She will change woke civil service culture that strays into antisemitism.”
“The civil service is the best workplace to be Jewish to be honest, everyone is so friendly, so it’s all quite strange.”
– A Jewish civil servant speaks to us anonymously
Reacting to the comments, a civil servant working in a major government department told HuffPost UK they had never once heard about an antisemitism problem.
The civil servant, who we are not naming, said: “Honestly, we’re used to ridiculous comments from ministers but to start throwing around that the civil service is antisemitic is such a baffling and odd attack and so offensive to civil servants.
Advertisement
“It’s also patently nonsensical to say ‘they’re so woke they’re antisemitic’. What on earth does that even mean? Every single day I consider leaving the civil service because of these people.”
Another civil servant, who is Jewish, told us there might have been some issues over diversity courses.
But they added: “I think she’s just vomited out a load of buzzwords and ended up with something objectionable.
“The civil service is the best workplace to be Jewish to be honest, everyone is so friendly, so it’s all quite strange.”
Dame Margaret Hodge and Dave Penman criticised Liz Truss’s comments.
Advertisement
A civil servant, who recently left for the private sector, said the “constant attacks” and lack of faith after partygate drove them to leave.
“I know of dozens of good civil servants who are leaving because of this negativity,” they added.
“How ministers, MPs, and leadership candidates can keep making unsubstantiated comments and threats, and still expect to have anyone who can actually deliver left, is beyond me.”
Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA union for senior civil servants, said Truss’s accusations were a “little ironic” given the Tories had been in power for 12 years.
“Truss’s accusation of antisemitism goes further than the usual dog-whistle politics that has been on display during this leadership campaign when it comes to the civil service,” he added.
“She provides no evidence for her accusation that many civil servants will find both insulting and abhorrent.”
Advertisement
Message I received re Truss: “I’m a Jewish civil servant (grew up modern orthodox) and I have absolutely no idea what she’s referring to. What does ‘Woke civil service culture strays into antisemitism’ even mean? I’ve never worked in a more inclusive and diverse environment” /1
Veteran Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge described the comments as “below the belt”.
The former cabinet minister, who is Jewish and has been outspoken about antisemitism in her own party, added: “Using antisemitism to peddle the right’s ‘anti-woke agenda’ is below the belt.
“The oldest form of racism is not a tool to use in the divisive culture war nonsense.”
Times journalist Hugo Rifkind commented: “This is baffling, but also grim. Equating Jews with rightwing reactionary politics is what leftwing antisemites do. Am pretty colossally unkeen on Tories doing it, too.”
This is baffling, but also grim. Equating Jews with rightwing reactionary politics is what leftwing antisemites do. Am pretty colossally unkeen on Tories doing it, too. https://t.co/Shqo0dZ9Bb
Sam Freedman, a senior fellow at the Institute for Government, said: “I worked in the civil service for three years and have worked with numerous officials on various things since then and have never once experienced any antisemitism. Bizarre comment.”
Advertisement
Journalist Etan Smallman tweeted: “Antisemitism is far too serious for anyone to be using it in the same sentence as ‘civil service wokeism’. Let alone our prospective prime minister.”
Dr Ruvi Ziegler, associate professor in international refugee law at the University of Reading, commented: “WTAF is ‘woke civil service culture’? Who comes up with this nonsense, and how on earth is this related to British Jews?”
Another Twitter user commented: “Attacking the civil service (who cannot respond in the media) is weak, pathetic and unbefitting someone seeking the highest office in the land.”
HuffPost UK contacted Truss’s team asking for evidence of an antisemitism problem in the civil service.
Her team referred us to an interview Truss gave to the Jewish Chronicle in which she pledged action to change civil service “woke” culture, including within the foreign office.
Advertisement
When discussing how she was committed to eradicating antisemitism in various bodies, she revealed she had to “overrule” foreign office officials who did not share her views.
The article did not outline what the issue was or what she specifically disagreed with civil servants on.
I was a Jew in the public sector for four years and engaged with the Civil Service on a daily basis.
I never once encountered anti-semitism. It was an exceptionally multicultural and tolerant environment.
The press release was issued after Truss spoke at a synagogue in Manchester.
In a written statement, hitting out at “civil service wokeism”, Truss said: “Every organisation has its culture, but it’s not fixed, it can be changed.
“That’s what ministerial leadership is about: it’s about making sure that the policies we represent, the values we stand for, are reflected in what we do. I’ve been very clear with our officials about the positions we take on Israel, and that will continue if I become prime minister.”
Advertisement
Truss also announced she would review whether schools are doing enough to educate about antisemitism, rid university campuses of antisemitism and work to secure a free trade agreement between the UK and Israel.
A Truss campaign source also appeared to link Labour’s antisemitism problem when Jeremy Corbyn was leader with Keir Starmer.
The source said: “The Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer and his colleague Jeremy Corbyn has been a talking shop for antisemitism and antizionism.
“This has increased anxieties within the Jewish community.”
Amazon and other multinational companies that shift profits to “avoid tax” in the UK should not benefit from Rishi Sunak’s post-Covid super deduction, MPs have said.
Senior Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge is leading cross-party moves to ensure multinationals that shift profits to lower tax countries do not benefit from the taxpayer subsidy, designed to boost investment as the UK recovers from the coronavirus pandemic.
The super deduction announced by the chancellor in March’s Budget would allow companies to reduce their tax bills by up to 25p for every £1 they invest in plant and machinery, according to the Treasury.
Sunak hopes the 130% super deduction will boost business investment by £20bn a year and contribute to the UK’s economic recovery.
But analysis by campaigners TaxWatch suggests the likes of Amazon could use the super deduction to “entirely wipe out” their UK tax bill, which is already low as the company’s European operations are based in Luxembourg.
Hodge has teamed up with senior Tory MP Andrew Mitchell to propose a cross-party amendment to the finance bill, which will put the super deduction in law.
She told HuffPost UK her super deduction amendment would ensure “our taxpayers’ money is not used to subsidise companies that deliberately avoid paying UK corporation tax”.
The former minister said: “We just think it is wrong that companies should be eligible for the super deduction scheme if they deliberately create financial structures which have no other purpose than to avoid tax, and if they deliberately export their profits.
“The way in which you can show that is by getting them to report their earnings country-by-country so you can see where the economic activity took place, and therefore where the profits were made, and therefore where they should be taxed.”
ADRIAN DENNIS via Getty ImagesA ‘picker’ worker collects items from storage shelves as she collates a customer order inside an Amazon.co.uk fulfillment centre in Hemel Hempstead, north of London, in 2015
She added: “What really riles taxpayers – obviously it riles people that they don’t pay their tax – but what is absolutely unacceptable is that we should then subsidise them further with taxpayers’ money,” she said.
“It is just the pits, and most people think that, and the government should wake up and listen to them.”
The amendment would force large multinationals that want to access super deductions to make public their country-by-country reporting on global activities, profits and taxes.
The government in 2016 accepted a cross-party amendment to force those companies to produce country-by-country reports, but the government at the moment only requires them to be submitted to HM Revenue and Customs, rather than be made public.
Separately, Hodge and Mitchell also want to make it easier to prosecute so-called “enablers” who design tax avoidance schemes.
Hodge argued that while individuals benefiting from such schemes are punished if they are found to be illegal, those that design them often get away “scot-free”.
She said: “If we start holding those enablers to account then you would much more quickly get rid of these egregious tax avoidance schemes which are constantly marketed.”
Mitchell told HuffPost UK: “We should really be moving towards a position where those who devise and set up these schemes are treated as guilty as those who use them.”
Amazon said it created 10,000 new jobs across the UK last year and has invested more than £23bn in the UK since 2010.
It paid £293m in direct taxes last year, as its sales surged 26% to £13.7bn.
