'Poisonous!' Sadiq Khan compares Suella Braverman to Enoch Powell in furious social media tirade
'Islamists are in CHARGE' - Philip Davies backs Suella Braverman
Sadiq Khan has torn into Suella Braverman on social media, comparing her to Enoch Powell and claiming she has made a "poisonous attempt to drive a wedge between our communities".
This came after Suella Braverman penned an Op-Ed claiming that Islamist extremists are now in charge of Britain.
Sadiq Khan has torn into Suella Braverman on social media, comparing her to Enoch Powell
PA
Writing on X, the Mayor of London said: "Suella Braverman seems to be doing her best to outflank Enoch Powell. It’s a poisonous attempt to drive a wedge between our communities and serve her own naked ambition. Now, more than ever, we should be seeking to unite, not divide."
Enoch Powell was a Conservative politician and member of Parliament, known for his controversial rhetoric concerning Britain's nonwhite population.
The former Home Secretary said Britain is "sleeping walking into a ghettoised society", something she claimed threatens free expression.
Writing in the Telegraph, Braverman accused the Labour leader of “being in hock” to extremists and “taking the Speaker hostage” with a “grubby backroom deal”.
She said: "The truth is that the Islamists, the extremists and the anti-Semites are in charge now.
"They have bullied the Labour Party, they have bullied our institutions, and now they have bullied our country into submission."
She accused politicians of "burying their heads in the sand", claiming they prefer to believe in an "illusion" of a successful multicultural society.
The former Home Secretary added: "But the law has not changed, mass extremism parades itself proudly, campuses remain dangerous places for Jews, and Labour is still rotten to the core."
But asked about Braverman's remarks, Home Secretary James Cleverly suggested he doesn't agree with his predecessor.
He told GB News Breakfast: "Obviously I remain very good friends with Suella and I listen hen she speaks. I don't necessarily always agree with everything she is saying.
"But parliamentarians have a duty to do what they believe to be right, not just what they believe to be popular - and they certainly shouldn't act because someone is threatening them."
Braverman's remarks came after Lindsay Hoyle admitted he was wrong when he decided to break with protocol as a result of security threats to MPs.
Hoyle sparked the fury of Tory and SNP MPs yesterday after he broke precedent by selecting a Labour amendment, along with a Government amendment, to an Opposition Day motion calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. Protocol dictates that the Commons Speaker would only select one of the amendments, and it is highly unusual for an opposition amendment to be selected.
He apologised to the House of Commons last night following a walkout by SNP and Tory MPs. Hoyle said it was never his “intent” for the Gaza debate to have descended into such mayhem.
The Speaker said: "Clearly today has not shown the House at it’s best. I’ll reflect on my part. I do not want it to have ended like this. I’ll meet with all the key players of each party."
He added that he wanted to offer MPs "the widest range of propositions on which to express a view", partly as a result of growing security threats facing MPs. He said he didn't want to have to “pick up the phone to find a friend, of whatever side, has been murdered by terrorists”.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Hoyle has been accused of bowing to pressure from Starmer to select the Labour amendment, an accusation both Labour and the Speaker have denied. If the Labour amendment hadn't been selected, his MPs would have had to choose between voting for a Government amendment - which stops short of demanding a ceasefire - or rebelling to vote for the SNP motion.
But Starmer denied that he threatened the Speaker, telling reporters: “I can categorically tell you that I did not threaten the Speaker in any way whatsoever.
“I simply urged to ensure that we have the broadest possible debate."