Protesters ejected from Labour conference after disrupting Chancellor’s speech

Two men have been ejected from the Labour Party conference after disrupting the Chancellor’s speech with a protest about pollution and arms exports to Israel.

The activists from protest group Climate Resistance were led from the conference centre in handcuffs and placed in a police van before being driven away.

Shortly after Rachel Reeves began her speech, the pair unfurled a banner reading “Still backing polluters, still arming Israel – we voted for change” and shouted slogans before they were escorted from the hall by security.

In response, Ms Reeves said: “This is a changed Labour Party, a Labour Party that represents working people, not a party of protest.”

Climate Resistance spokesperson Sam Simons said: “Labour promised us change – instead we’re getting more of the same. The same pandering to the fossil fuel industry; the same arms licences that are fuelling a genocide in Gaza, and the same austerity that sees the poorest hit hardest.

“It’s time for Labour to start putting the needs of people before the interests of profit. That means immediately stopping arms licences to Israel, blocking new oil and gas, and standing up for the communities already being devastated by the climate crisis.”

Labour has seen several events disrupted by protesters in recent years, with a climate activist heckling Sir Keir Starmer during the party’s manifesto launch in Manchester in June and a protester throwing glitter over him during his speech to the party conference last year.

Opponents of the Government’s decision to continue allowing some arms exports to Israel also staged a protest outside the entrance to the conference centre on Sunday.

The Government has withdrawn licences for some arms exports to Israel over concerns the country is violating international humanitarian law in Gaza, but some within Labour have argued stronger action is needed including a full arms embargo.

On Sunday, Foreign Secretary David Lammy told a fringe event that a wider embargo would be a “mistake” that would “lead to a wider war”.