Anger grew online after headlines by ITV News -- and other organizations -- suggested that the musician had said the UK was 100% racist, instead of his assertion that there was racism in the country.
In an interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica last week, Stormzy was asked if the UK was still racist today, to which he replied "definitely, 100%"
When pressed by journalist Antonello Guerrera, the star elaborated further, saying that racism in the UK was more "hidden" than in Italy, but that it had worsened under Prime Minister Boris Johnson's premiership.
The Sun's headline about the interview read "Stormzy launches Twitter tirade after reports he said Britain was '100% racist,'" LBC ran with "Stormzy says he believes Britain is "100 per cent" a racist country," while the Daily Mail said "Stormzy claims the UK is 'definitely racist'" in its headline.
On Sunday the artist retweeted ITV's story, headlined "Rapper Stormzy says UK is '100 per cent' racist," responding "ITV you lot can suck my d**k for this."
He took to Twitter, accusing some media outlets of "intentionally spinning my words for some click bait."
ITV News responded to the criticism, apologizing to the musician for "any misunderstanding."
"On Saturday we reported on an interview by an Italian newspaper with the British rapper Stormzy in which the subject of racism in the UK was discussed," the broadcaster posted. The outlet noted that Stormzy's response was reproduced in full on its website.
"Despite this, it was felt the headline at the top of this story on our website and Twitter post did not reflect these comments fully and was therefore amended ... We would like to apologise to Stormzy for any misunderstanding," the outlet said.
A spokesperson for the Evening Standard also confirmed that the newspaper had amended its headline following Stormzy's comments.
"The headline in this story initially said: "Stormzy says UK is 'definitely 100% racist' and worse since Boris Johnson became PM," a spokesperson for the Evening Standard told CNN.
"After Stormzy said that his comments had been misinterpreted, we have amended the headline," they added.
Italian reporter Guerrera posted a full transcript of the interview to Twitter on Saturday, which he said was the "original and only reliable source."
CNN has contacted ITV, the Sun, LBC and the Daily Mail for further comment.
LONDON—The British government turned to a top financial regulator as the next governor of the Bank of England, an appointment seen as a cautious choice for a role that will be critical in guiding the economy as the U.K. leaves the European Union.
The government said Andrew Bailey, the chief executive of the Financial Conduct Authority, will assume the new role in March. He will take over from Mark Carney, a former governor of the Bank of Canada, who has headed the BOE since 2013.
“He is the right person to lead the bank as we forge a new future outside the EU and level up opportunity across the country,” Sajid Javid, the U.K.’s Treasury chief, said Friday.
Like Jerome Powell, who took over at the Federal Reserve in February 2018, and Christine Lagarde who last month became the president of the European Central Bank, Mr. Bailey isn’t a specialist in monetary policy.
He has, however, held a number of jobs at the BOE, including as head of the group that studied the global economy. He left the institution in 2016 to become the head of the FCA.
During his previous stints at the BOE, Mr. Bailey wasn’t directly involved in setting interest rates, and his views on monetary policy are unknown. As head of the FCA, he has been a member of the BOE’s Financial Policy Committee, which sets the rules for British banks.
“Bailey is known to be cautious, pragmatic and a safe pair of hands,” wrote JPMorgan economist Allan Monks in a note to clients. “Given his background, Bailey seems likely to offer stability, experience and continuity as governor rather than introducing controversial or radical changes.”
The U.K.’s planned departure from the EU has been the main challenge facing the BOE’s policy makers since the 2016 referendum. The economic outlook has been dominated by the uncertainties facing businesses and households about the timing and terms of the departure, limiting the BOE’s freedom to change policy.
The central bank last moved its key interest rate in August 2018, raising it to 0.75% from 0.5%.
While those uncertainties have been slightly reduced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s victory in last week’s election, they haven’t disappeared. Mr. Johnson’s pledge to not extend a post-Brexit transition period at the end of 2020 means the U.K. could leave the bloc without a free-trade agreement, potentially leading to tariffs and other obstacles to trade.
The BOE has long said that, assuming the uncertainties over Brexit ease and global economic growth steadies, it may gradually raise its key interest rate to a limited degree. But more recently, some policy makers have argued for a rate cut, saying moderate rises in consumer prices and a weak growth outlook made such a move necessary.
Mr. Bailey will take over at a time of greater political scrutiny of central banks, whose public profile rose when they played a key role in guiding economies through the fallout from the global financial crisis. President Trump has been a frequent critic of the Fed’s interest-rate policies, which he believes are too restrictive, while German politicians and economists have attacked the ECB for setting a negative interest rate.
Newsletter Sign-up
Most of the criticism directed at the BOE has related to Brexit. Advocates of the U.K.’s departure from the EU have questioned the central bank’s economic forecasts, which they see as too gloomy and reflecting a prejudice against Brexit rather than objective analysis. With Brexit now almost certain to happen before Mr. Bailey takes office, those criticisms may ease.
The appointment comes as the balance between monetary and fiscal policy is changing in the U.K. During Mr. Carney’s tenure, the government cut its spending as part of an austerity program designed to halt and then reverse a sharp rise in its debts in the wake of the financial crisis. The BOE, by contrast, kept its key interest rate low to support growth.
Mr. Johnson has promised to increase investment spending, a move that would share the burden of supporting growth with the central bank.
Mr. Bailey will take over an institution that was transformed during Mr. Carney’s tenure. Mr. Carney was recruited to revamp an institution that was judged to have failed to safeguard economic stability ahead of the financial crisis, and has greatly expanded its regulatory reach. Mr. Bailey is unlikely to have to oversee a similar overhaul.
“It’s not as if you need to reinvent the wheel,” said Gilles Moec, chief economist at AXA Investment Management.
Mr. Carney had initially planned to step down from his role at the BOE after five years, but extended his tenure twice to help steer the U.K. economy through Brexit.
Mr. Bailey will be a familiar face to international central bankers, including those at the Fed. He has worked for both the Financial Stability Board and the International Organization of Securities Commissions. He will be the 121st governor of an institution that was founded in 1694.
MPs will vote later on whether to back the prime minister's plan for the UK to leave the EU on 31 January.
The EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill would also ban the government from extending the transition period - where the UK is out of the EU but follows many of its rules - past 2020.
Boris Johnson said it would allow the UK to "move forward".
Opponents say the bill leaves the UK's future uncertain, and agreeing a trade deal with the EU could take many years.
But the government insists one can be in place by the end the transition period.
The result of the Commons vote on the bill is expected at about 15:00 GMT.
Beginning the debate in the Commons, the prime minister said his bill "learns the emphatic lesson of the last Parliament" and "rejects any further delay".
"It ensures we depart on 31 January. At that point Brexit will be done. It will be over," he told MPs.
"The sorry story of the last three years will be at an end and we can move forward."
Mr Johnson said it also "paves the way" for a "ambitious free trade deal" with the EU.
"The oven is on, it is set at gas mark four, we can have it done at lunchtime and the new deal I negotiated will restore our great institutions," he said.
The bill's second reading is the first chance MPs have had to debate its main principles in the House of Commons.
With the Conservatives having won an 80-seat majority at last week's general election, the bill is expected to pass easily, before it moves on to further scrutiny by MPs and the House of Lords.
MPs have been given a further three days - 7, 8 and 9 January - to continue their debate in the Commons.
The government says it will get the bill into law in time for the 31 January Brexit deadline.
An earlier withdrawal agreement - reached between previous Prime Minister Theresa May and the EU - was rejected three times by MPs.
Media playback is unsupported on your device
There are changes to the previous bill, which was backed by the Commons in October, but withdrawn by the government after MPs rejected a three-day deadline for getting it through Parliament.
The changes include:
Legally prohibiting the government from extending the transition period - during which a trade deal between the UK and EU will be discussed - beyond 31 December 2020
Allowing more UK courts to reconsider European Court of Justice rulings that have been retained in UK law after Brexit
Requiring ministers to report annually to Parliament on disputes with the EU under the prime minister's withdrawal agreement
Repealing spent legislation that "now serves no purpose"
The bill also loses a previous clause on strengthening workers' rights.
The government now says it will deal with this issue in a separate piece of legislation, but the TUC has warned that the change will help "drive down" working conditions.
What a difference a year makes.
It was back in January that Theresa May embarked on a series of Commons defeats as she tried and failed to begin the process of getting her Brexit plans approved.
It was only in October that Boris Johnson paused his own efforts when MPs rejected the proposed timetable for getting the Withdrawal Agreement through parliament.
But now, following the general election and with an 80-strong Conservative majority, things look very different.
And Boris Johnson knows it, claiming that it's time for "certainty" after years of "delay and rancour".
But the bill will come in for criticism. Gone are clauses about workers' rights - Downing Street says that will be dealt with in separate legislation.
And added: a provision ruling out any extension to the transition period beyond December 2020.
The process of ratifying the Withdrawal Agreement Bill will continue in the New Year but Friday's vote is, in part, designed to signal that the UK is now motoring towards that January 31 departure date.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the government's "mishandling of Brexit" had "paralysed the political system," divided communities and was a "national embarrassment".
He said MPs "have to respect the decision" of the EU referendum in 2016 "and move on".
"However, that doesn't mean that we as a party should abandon our basic principles," he said.
"Labour will not support this bill as we remain certain there is a better and fairer way for this country to leave the EU."
He said there had to be something better than this "terrible" Brexit deal that would not "sell out public services" or "sacrifice hundreds of thousands of jobs in the process".
The SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford said: "Scotland still totally and utterly rejects Brexit, yet the prime minister is blindly hurtling towards the cliff edge with these Brexit plans that will leave us poorer, leave us worse off."
On the change in the bill that would legally prohibit the government from extending the transition period beyond 31 December 2020, Mr Blackford said: "By placing that deadline, that risk of a no-deal Brexit, that we all fear is very much, is on the table again."
But Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay rejected the criticism, saying the bill offered "increased scrutiny" of the Brexit process to Parliament.
In the 2016 referendum, the UK voted by 52% to 48% to leave the EU. But the subsequent difficulties in getting Brexit through Parliament have caused gridlock at Westminster.
The SNP saw this as a "material change in circumstances" which would justify a second independence ballot, because Scotland faced being taken out of the EU "against its will".
And the party has since performed strongly in elections. It won 48 of the 59 seats north of the border in last week's general election, while campaigning to "put Scotland's future in Scotland's hands".
Scotland
After 59 of 59 seats
Scottish National PartySNP
48 seats
, +13 seats compared to 2017
ConservativeCON
6 seats
, -7 seats compared to 2017
Liberal DemocratLD
4 seats
, +0 seats compared to 2017
LabourLAB
1 seats
, -6 seats compared to 2017
Does Scotland have the power to hold a referendum?
There has long been legal debate over whether the Scottish Parliament, rather than MPs at Westminster, could pass the laws needed for a new vote on independence to be held - but the matter has never been tested in court.
In any case, Ms Sturgeon wants the UK government to agree a transfer of powers allowing a referendum to be held, as happened in 2014.
Ms Sturgeon, the SNP leader, says this would ensure the referendum result was seen as being entirely legal and legitimate, particularly by the EU.
The first minister's position is that Mr Johnson and the Conservatives may "rage against reality" for a while, but will ultimately have to give in to "democracy".
Her other option might be to target a really big win in the Scottish Parliament elections in 2021, on an explicit platform of demanding a referendum, to increase pressure on the UK government.
Would Scots vote for independence?
This is the big question - after all Nicola Sturgeon doesn't just want to hold referendum, she wants to win one.
Polling data collected by What Scotland Thinks suggests an increase in support for independence - but it generally remains just short of a majority.
Excluding "don't knows", the average of polls this year has been 51% No to 49% Yes. The average for 2018 was 55% to 45% - the same as the 2014 referendum.
The SNP hopes that a combination of Brexit and hostility within Scotland to Mr Johnson will start to push the dial further in its direction.
Would an independent Scotland stay in the EU?
In practice, Scotland would not become independent the day after a Yes vote - there would have to be a period of transition.
In 2014, the pro-independence side said it would take 18 months to set up an independent Scottish state.
Even if a referendum was held tomorrow, the transition would therefore run beyond the end of 2020 - when the UK is due to complete its exit from the EU.
This means Scotland would leave the EU with the rest of the UK, and would need to apply to join again.
Scottish ministers accept they would have to go through an "accession process" for EU membership, but want to start this "as soon as possible".
What would it take for Scotland to rejoin the EU?
Scotland would have to jump through the same hoops as any state seeking to join the EU, although it would have the advantage of having recently been a member.
The accession criteria throw up a whole series of questions about things like currency, deficit levels and borders.
Ms Sturgeon has been pressed on many of these topics already, arguing that Scotland could initially continue to use the pound and would not need to join the euro. She says the country's financial position could be brought within EU rules by growing the economy.
However, her own party's prospectus for independence suggests this could take several years, whereas she wants to rejoin the EU as quickly as possible.
The first minister also wants to avoid a hard border between Scotland and England.
She has said answers about this and a whole range of other questions will be set out in detail ahead of any vote.
The SNP saw this as a "material change in circumstances" which would justify a second independence ballot, because Scotland faced being taken out of the EU "against its will".
And the party has since performed strongly in elections. It won 48 of the 59 seats north of the border in last week's general election, while campaigning to "put Scotland's future in Scotland's hands".
Scotland
After 59 of 59 seats
Scottish National PartySNP
48 seats
, +13 seats compared to 2017
ConservativeCON
6 seats
, -7 seats compared to 2017
Liberal DemocratLD
4 seats
, +0 seats compared to 2017
LabourLAB
1 seats
, -6 seats compared to 2017
Does Scotland have the power to hold a referendum?
There has long been legal debate over whether the Scottish Parliament, rather than MPs at Westminster, could pass the laws needed for a new vote on independence to be held - but the matter has never been tested in court.
In any case, Ms Sturgeon wants the UK government to agree a transfer of powers allowing a referendum to be held, as happened in 2014.
Ms Sturgeon, the SNP leader, says this would ensure the referendum result was seen as being entirely legal and legitimate, particularly by the EU.
The first minister's position is that Mr Johnson and the Conservatives may "rage against reality" for a while, but will ultimately have to give in to "democracy".
Her other option might be to target a really big win in the Scottish Parliament elections in 2021, on an explicit platform of demanding a referendum, to increase pressure on the UK government.
Would Scots vote for independence?
This is the big question - after all Nicola Sturgeon doesn't just want to hold referendum, she wants to win one.
Polling data collected by What Scotland Thinks suggests an increase in support for independence - but it generally remains just short of a majority.
Excluding "don't knows", the average of polls this year has been 51% No to 49% Yes. The average for 2018 was 55% to 45% - the same as the 2014 referendum.
The SNP hopes that a combination of Brexit and hostility within Scotland to Mr Johnson will start to push the dial further in its direction.
Would an independent Scotland stay in the EU?
In practice, Scotland would not become independent the day after a Yes vote - there would have to be a period of transition.
In 2014, the pro-independence side said it would take 18 months to set up an independent Scottish state.
Even if a referendum was held tomorrow, the transition would therefore run beyond the end of 2020 - when the UK is due to complete its exit from the EU.
This means Scotland would leave the EU with the rest of the UK, and would need to apply to join again.
Scottish ministers accept they would have to go through an "accession process" for EU membership, but want to start this "as soon as possible".
What would it take for Scotland to rejoin the EU?
Scotland would have to jump through the same hoops as any state seeking to join the EU, although it would have the advantage of having recently been a member.
The accession criteria throw up a whole series of questions about things like currency, deficit levels and borders.
Ms Sturgeon has been pressed on many of these topics already, arguing that Scotland could initially continue to use the pound and would not need to join the euro. She says the country's financial position could be brought within EU rules by growing the economy.
However, her own party's prospectus for independence suggests this could take several years, whereas she wants to rejoin the EU as quickly as possible.
The first minister also wants to avoid a hard border between Scotland and England.
She has said answers about this and a whole range of other questions will be set out in detail ahead of any vote.
To pull off its landslide victory in last week’s election, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party flipped dozens of districts in the “red wall” of British politics — a gritty stronghold of coal and factory towns that had supported the Labour Party for decades.
Our correspondent traveled across the United Kingdom to understand what the region’s political realignment may foretell about the future of the country.
On today’s episode:
Patrick Kingsley, an international correspondent for The New York Times who spoke with constituents in Shirebrook, England.
Image
Dennis Skinner, a former Labour member of Parliament, lost his seat to a Conservative in last week’s election.Credit...Phil Noble/Reuters
Background reading:
“Votes for the pro-Brexit Conservatives had 10 times the effective power of votes for the anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats.” Our columnist writes that is thanks to the electoral system used in Britain and the United States.
Tune in, and tell us what you think. Email us at thedaily@nytimes.com. Follow Michael Barbaro on Twitter: @mikiebarb. And if you’re interested in advertising with “The Daily,” write to us at thedaily-ads@nytimes.com.
Patrick Kingsley contributed reporting.
“The Daily” is made by Theo Balcomb, Andy Mills, Lisa Tobin, Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Annie Brown, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Larissa Anderson, Wendy Dorr, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Alexandra Leigh Young, Jonathan Wolfe, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, Adizah Eghan, Kelly Prime, Julia Longoria, Sindhu Gnanasambandan, JazmÃn Aguilera, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Austin Mitchell, Sayre Quevedo, Monika Evstatieva, Neena Pathak and Dave Shaw. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Mikayla Bouchard, Stella Tan, Julia Simon and Lauren Jackson.
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson gestures as he speaks to supporters on a visit to meet newly elected Conservative party MP for Sedgefield, Paul Howell at Sedgefield Cricket Club on December 14, 2019 in County Durham, England. F
WPA Pool
The pound fell more than 1% in early trade Tuesday after media reports said that the British government will make it illegal for the post-Brexit transition period to be extended, leaving little time for a trade deal to be agreed with the EU.
Local media reported early Tuesday that Johnson will add a revision to the Brexit bill (formally known as the Withdrawal Agreement Bill) that would explicitly rule out any extension to the transition period beyond December 2020. The U.K. is due to leave the EU by January 31, 2020.
The reports have raised concerns that the U.K.'s new, more empowered government under Prime Minister Boris Johnson could be steering the country towards a harder Brexit.
The legislation, if implemented, would leave only 11 months for a trade deal to be struck with the EU and many people think that is not enough time.
Early Tuesday morning, the pound was down almost 0.4% against the dollar, at $1.3282 before weakening further to fall below $1.32.
The transition period seen as a time of adjustment for both sides post-Brexit. Crucially, it's a time in which the EU and U.K. can negotiate a trade deal.
During the transition period, EU laws continue to apply in the U.K. as if it's a member state, but the country would no longer be represented in the EU's decision-making bodies. Currently, the transition period has the option of being extended for up to two years if both sides agree.
British media reports say that the Johnson's government will try to make it illegal for the transition period to be extended in a bid to put more more pressure on the EU and to fast-track a trade deal.
Boris Johnson's move comes from an emboldened Conservative Party which won a resounding victory in last week's general election and gained a majority of 80 seats in Parliament. The win was seen as enabling Johnson to pursue his party's own Brexit agenda more easily and Tuesday's news appears to support that.
The U.K. has a vested interest in signing a speedy trade deal. It is keen to strike trade deals with other nations outside the bloc (a large part of the pro-Brexit argument was that leaving the EU would allow the U.K. to trade freely with the rest of the world) and while it can negotiate trade deals during the transition period, these cannot come into force until the transition period ends.
Experts think most countries will want to see what the U.K.'s trading relationship will be like with the EU before they negotiate their own trade deals with Britain, however.
Johnson empowered
Close follower of Brexit proceedings and J.P. Morgan Economist Malcolm Barr said that Johnson's move was a surprise in that it was done without apparent pressure from a group of influential hard Brexit supporters, known as the European Research Group (ERG), from within the Conservative Party.
"As much as we anticipated that the possibility of extending the transition period would be removed from U.K. law, it comes as something of a surprise to us that Johnson appears to have done this entirely voluntarily, rather than as a result of pressure from amendments proposed by the ERG as the legislation came to the (House of) Commons. The signal of intent on his part is, in our view, very clear," he said in a note Tuesday.
Following the latest media reports, Barr said the risk of a "no deal" end to the transition period stood at 25%, "a number we regard as uncomfortably high."
"The negotiation process is path dependent and we could find ourselves on that path even though neither negotiating views it as their first preference," he warned, although J.P. Morgan believes that some form of "deal" has a higher probability of 50%.
"Within the spectrum of probabilities, however, we are changing the numbers so that a simple (Withdrawal) Treaty amendment which changes the end date of the transition has less probability, while some form of "deal" has more. Given the commitment Johnson is now set to enshrine in law, it looks like whatever agreement is reached will be presented as a new deal, even if it takes large parts of the transition conditions and pushes them into 2021."
Crowd-pleaser
The reported move to block any delay to is seen as a way for the government to show voters that backed the Conservative Party (many of whom doing so for the first time having abandoned the opposition Labour Party in droves) that it is determined for the U.K. to leave the EU without further delay.
Since the EU referendum in June 2016, many British voters have become frustrated with multiple instances of political deadlock. The Conservatives were seen to have performed well with much of the electorate in the election due to its mantra that it would "get Brexit done."
The latest government move has drawn criticism from the opposition, with the Labour Party's Shadow Brexit Secretary Kier Starmer saying it represents "reckless and irresponsible behavior we have come to expect from Boris Johnson's Government."
But Conservative Minister Michael Gove said Tuesday that the government was committed to securing a trade deal with the EU by the end of 2020, Reuters reported.
A weaker pound gave a little boost to U.K. equities Tuesday with London's FTSE 100 index trading in positive territory while its continental counterparts traded lower. Maarten Geerdink, head of European equities at NN Investment Partners, told CNBC Tuesday that the latest reports from the U.K. would "produce another cliffhanger for Europe."
"It will be another target that the market can focus on," he told CNBC's Capital Connection. "But I do think the fact that he (Prime Minister Boris Johnson) has such a huge majority in parliament does give him a lot more room to get the deal done." Geerdink cautioned investors that "there is still some time to see how this plays out," however.
.1576572332014.jpeg)