MP Mike Amesbury has said he will stand down after being convicted of assault, which our political correspondent Liz Bates said gives Reform a chance to cause a real headache for the prime minister. Meanwhile, the government rejects calls for an inquiry into the murder of MP David Amess.
Monday 10 March 2025 18:27, UK
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has been speaking to broadcasters in the past few minutes about the Rupert Lowe controversy.
This is relating to the Great Yarmouth MP who has been suspended from the party following allegations of assault and bullying.
Lowe denies all the allegations against him.
Need a quick catch-up on who said what? Our political correspondent Liz Bates has everything you need to know:
Farage was asked if the action against Lowe happened because the MP challenged him, having questioned his leadership in a Daily Mail interview just last week.
The former UKIP leader denied this is the case.
He also played down the suggestion that all the political movements he leads end up bogged down in infighting.
Both UKIP and the Brexit referendum saw Farage face challenges and scandal.
Talking to broadcasters today, the Reform leader said: “I don’t fall out with anybody. I just get on and do what I do. They fall out with me.”
He added that his focus is still the local elections on 1 May.
‘A little bit out of control’
On the row with Lowe, Farage said “things have got a little bit out of control” since the complaints against the Great Yarmouth MP were revealed last Friday.
He said there was a “behavioural problem” with Lowe that has been going on “for some months” – including “outbursts, anger, that kind of thing”.
Farage added that many of Lowe’s comments in public recently have been “wrong” and the public are “not quite getting the full facts” from him.
Since Runcorn and Helsby MP Mike Amesbury was convicted of assault it seemed almost possible that he would save his political career.
Today, we finally got the confirmation that he won’t – as he announced he is stepping down and triggering a by-election.
It’s the first of Sir Keir Starmer’s premiership and will be a big test for the prime minister in a seat where Reform are second.
Losing it would be an unmitigated disaster given the 14,000 majority achieved last time round.
Labour have a fight on their hands
But even if Labour do hold on, any significant shifts to Reform will be a boost for Nigel Farage’s party.
The most significant factor to keep an eye on will be whether their impressive polling gains can be converted into votes at the ballot box.
Knowing the damage that will do to morale on the government benches, Labour HQ will fight hard.
On the other side, well-resourced Reform will also throw everything at it, aware that it could be a pivotal moment in British politics.
Former Labour MP Mike Amesbury was able to confirm his intention to stand down today after his 10-week jail sentence for punching a constituent was suspended.
He was jailed last month but upon appeal the sentence was suspended for two years, allowing him to walk free from prison.
Amesbury, who has sat as an independent MP since the incident last October, told the BBC today he would quit, triggering a by-election in Runcorn and Helsby.
What happened?
Amesbury, 55, pleaded guilty in January to beating by assault after punching Paul Fellows, 45, in Main Street, Frodsham, Cheshire, in the early hours of 26 October after his constituent asked him about a bridge closure.
He had been set to serve 40% of his sentence – four weeks – in prison followed by a year on licence.
However, his lawyer launched an appeal shortly after he was sentenced, and after the appeal was heard at Chester Crown Court, the judge said his jail time should be suspended.
A by-election will be triggered in Runcorn and Helsby.
The seat was held by disgraced former Labour MP Mike Amesbury.
But he has decided to step away from the Commons following his conviction for punching a man.
Speaking to the BBC, Amesbury said he would resign “as soon as possible”.
Could Reform challenge Labour?
His decision will prevent the drawn-out spectacle of constituents recalling Amesbury.
MPs can’t technically resign from the Commons, but they can be appointed to the defunct roles of either crown steward and bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds or crown steward and bailiff of the Manor of Northstead by the Treasury.
By holding these roles, they become ineligible to be MPs and so get removed from the Commons.
In last year’s election, Amesbury came first with 22,358 votes – equating to 52.9% of the electorate.
Reform UK came in second with 7,662 votes – 18.1% – and the Tories in third with 6,756 votes – 16%.
Recent betting odds on the seat suggest Reform could win the seat off Labour in what will be the first by-election since Sir Keir Starmer became prime minister last year.
It’s time for our first teatime bulletin of the week – here are the main things you need to know today:
Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge is live from 7pm.
Joining us tonight are Katie Amess and her adviser Radd Seiger, and former Conservative Party donor Mohamed Amersi.
On our panel are ex-Labour MP Jonathan Ashworth and former government adviser Mercy Muroki.
By Josh Gafson, politics producer, and Liz Bates, political correspondent
Claims of bullying against ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe are “nonsense”, according to a current staff member.
The woman, who asked not to be named, added that he is a “good man” who is being subjected to a “horrific and unfair” ordeal.
The embattled Great Yarmouth MP was suspended by his party over the weekend after being accused by party chiefs of bullying two female staff members and threatening Reform chair Zia Yusuf.
‘He has done nothing wrong’
But today, another of his employees has spoken out in his defence.
They told Sky News: “Rupert is a good man who does not deserve any of this. He has done nothing wrong.
“The allegations aren’t against Rupert. I’ve not seen any evidence of any bullying from anyone in Rupert’s office.
“These claims are nonsense. This is wrong what they’re doing to Rupert.
“He’s nice to everybody. What they’re putting him through is horrific and unfair. They are vexatious complaints.
“There has never been any bullying in the office.”
Reform vows to uphold ‘highest standards’
A Reform UK spokesman said the party “acted on serious allegations by two female members of Mr Lowe’s team by appointing an independent KC to investigate”.
“We feel we have a duty of care to all our staff, whether employed directly or indirectly,” they added.
“Reform UK stands for the highest standards of conduct in public life, and we will apply these standards without fear nor favour.”
Ukrainian and US officials are meeting in Saudi Arabia this week set to discuss whether there is a way forward to peace in the war with Russia.
It comes on the back of a policy reversal from Washington after Donald Trump re-entered office, with the Republican putting heavy pressure on Kyiv to stop their fighting.
This has included withdrawing intelligence support and the bust up in the Oval Office between Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Ahead of this summit, Downing Street has confirmed Sir Keir Starmer and Trump spoke today for around 20 minutes.
PM hopes for ‘positive outcome’
The prime minister’s spokesperson said UK officials had spoken to Ukrainian counterparts as well, with several deadly attacks on Ukraine launched from Russia.
The spokesperson said Starmer wants to see intelligence sharing resume as quickly as possible.
They added: “The prime minister said he hoped there would be a positive outcome to the talks that would enable US aid and intelligence sharing to be restarted.
“The two leaders also spoke about the economic deal they had discussed at the White House and the prime minister welcomed the detailed conversations that had already happened to move this forward. Both leaders agreed to stay in touch.”
It is understood Starmer and Trump also discussed tariffs.
Last week, a row broke out involving both Labour and the Conservatives, and the independent Sentencing Council.
A bit of background
This was due to advice published by the council – which stated that people who are from an “ethnic minority, cultural minority, and/or faith minority community” should be considered for a pre-sentence report before judgement is passed after they have committed a crime.
Our political reporter Alix Culbertson examined the topic further here.
When the advice was published last week, shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick was quick to accuse Labour of wanting ethnic minorities to receive more lenient sentences.
Actual Justice Secretary Shabanah Mahmood then pointed out the guidance was consulted on when the Tories were in power, and then wrote to the Sentencing Council requesting they change the guidance – or she would intervene.
What’s new?
Well, today the head of the council, Lord Justice William Davis, has published his response in the form of a letter to Mahmood.
Running to six full A4 pages, it contains a somewhat brisk run-through of the history of his organisation.
But towards the end, the lawyer starts turning the screws on the politicians.
In a semi-transparent jab at Jenrick, Davis writes he has “seen it suggested that the guideline instructs sentencers to impose a more lenient sentence on those from ethnic minorities”.
This is “completely wrong”, he says.
Jenrick had told our presenter Wilfred Frost that the new guidance showed “blatant bias against Christians and straight, white men” (watch that exchange above).
And what of the government?
Davis is slightly less disobliging – but equally critical – of the government.
He says he will need to take legal advice on whether Mahmood has the right to intervene in the situation.
Davis writes that he does “not accept the premise” of the “objection” by the justice secretary.
He says he “respectfully question[s]” whether the decision to include the list of people who may benefit from a pre-sentence review – which was not exhaustive – was a “policy decision of any significance”.
Davis then argues that having the government dictate sentencing guidelines, when the state prosecutes offenders, would breach judicial independence.
Why didn’t the government complain before?
In his letter, Davis also lays out a bit of a timeline for the guidance.
He says the guidelines in question were discussed at 15 council meetings between 2022 and 2025.
Davis states the government’s response to the proposals did not raise any objections – although he does not highlight that this took place under the Conservatives, rather than Labour.
But he says the current justice secretary’s representative to the council raised no objections to the guidance shortly before they were published.
Davis finishes his letter: “I look forward to meeting you to discuss these matters.”
By Tim Baker, political reporter
Phone centre waiting times for public services could be cut in half by using AI, a minister has suggested.
Speaking to Sky News, Science, Innovation and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said the technology was “win-win” as it will save the taxpayer money and make the public experience better.
“I am determined to drive this technology through the government,” he added.
Meet Caddy
Long waiting times has long blighted those trying to access services like Citizens Advice, HMRC and the DVLA.
But with the government talking of an AI revolution, one trial has used the tech to drastically reduce the volume of minutes spent on hold.
Citizens Advice teams in Stockport, Oldham, Rochdale, and Trafford have managed to cut the average phone call length from eight minutes to four in a months’ long trial.
The AI helper, Caddy, was developed in house by the team in Manchester. Its success led to interest from the government, and there are now hopes it can be expanded into public services.
Citizens Advice is run as a series of charities. There are hopes Caddy will be rolled-out nationwide across the service later this year.
The government’s decision not to hold an inquiry into the murder of Conservative MP Sir David Amess has put the Prevent counter-terror programme back in the spotlight.
The killer, Ali Harbi Ali, was referred to the scheme, but a review found he was released too quickly – and he then went on to murder Amess, having been radicalised by Islamic State.
The government insists the scheme has improved since then – but from this case to last year’s Southport murders, it has been controversial.
What is Prevent?
In short, Prevent’s aim is to “stop people from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism”.
The government-led, multi-agency scheme also helps to rehabilitate and disengage those who are already involved in terrorism, and safeguard communities from threats.
Referrals to Prevent from the likes of schools and government bodies lead to a “gateway assessment”, made by specialist police officers to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect a person is “susceptible to becoming a terrorist or supporting terrorism”.
The individual will then receive tailored support to reduce their susceptibility to being radicalised into terrorism, if appropriate.
The Prevent programme has three main aims:
Sky’s Tom Cheshire breaks down the type of people being referred:
Prevent gets thousands of referrals every year. In the year ending 31 March 2024, 6,884 people were reported to it, with individuals aged 11 to 15 accounting for the largest proportion (40%).
The strategy was introduced as part of the government’s wider counter-terrorism strategy, known by the acronym Contest.
Prevent is one of four themes within Contest. These are its components:
• Prevent: to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism
• Pursue: to stop terrorist attacks happening
• Protect: to strengthen our protection against a terrorist attack
• Prepare: to minimise the impact of a terrorist attack.
Referrals that are deemed particularly serious, where there is a “genuine risk of radicalisation”, are escalated to the government’s other multi-agency anti-terrorism strategy, Channel.
Channel has a panel of professionals who assess the case and decide on a tailored package of support that can be offered to the person.
It is chaired by the local authority and can include partners such as the police, children’s services, social services, education professionals and mental health care professionals.
Why has Prevent proved controversial?
Criticism of Prevent has shifted over the years.
In the mid-2010s, much of it focused on how its processes allegedly targeted minorities, and particularly Muslims.
Some criticised Prevent for concentrating its resources too much on Islamism rather than on extreme right-wing threats.
Several high-profile terror attacks since its introduction, along with Britons joining groups including Islamic State, have further called into question the strategy’s effectiveness.
An independent review was ordered into Prevent in 2019, and its findings published in 2023 called for “major reform”.
‘Double standard’
The wide-ranging review found Prevent “has a double standard when dealing with the extreme right-wing and Islamism”.
The review highlighted that Prevent had taken an “expansive approach to the extreme right-wing, capturing a variety of influences that, at times, has been so broad it has included mildly controversial or provocative forms of mainstream, right-wing leaning commentary that have no meaningful connection to terrorism or radicalisation”.
In regard to Islamism, it said the programme tended to take a “much narrower approach centred around proscribed organisations, ignoring the contribution of non-violent Islamist narratives and networks to terrorism”.
The government accepted all 34 recommendations by the review in its 188-page report, which also included resetting its thresholds, or “bars”, to a clearer standard.
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free
