Connect with us

Politics

How Has Mandelson’s Downfall Endangered Starmer?

Published

on

Ex-Prime Minister and Labour Party leader, Gordon Brown, right, and then-Business Secretary Peter Mandelson react as they speak to the media about economy in a press conference in London, Monday, April 19, 2010.

Keir Starmer’s premiership is hanging by a thread this weekend as new details about Peter Mandelson’s friendship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein continue to drip into the public consciousness.

When the prime minister sacked Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to Washington over his Epstein ties in September, he must have hoped the scandal was dealt with. The events of the past week show how wrong he was.

The latest chapter in the saga was triggered by the US Department of Justice publishing more than three million documents on the late sex offender and his connections to the rich and powerful.

The files revealed that Mandelson was even more entwined with the disgraced financier than previously assumed – putting Starmer’s judgement in appointing him to the plum diplomatic role into sharp focus.

Advertisement

Amid mounting anger from the public and his own MPs, the prime minister ended up apologising on Thursday for ever believing Mandelson’s “lies”.

Here’s a breakdown of how we got to this point – and what might happen next.

Who Is Peter Mandelson?

Mandelson has been in Labour circles for decades, often referred to as the “Prince of Darkness” because of his ruthless nature, capacity for scandals and love of political intrigue.

Advertisement

He worked as the director of communications to then-party leader Neil Kinnock in the 1980s before being elected as the Labour MP for Hartlepool in 1992.

A key architect of the New Labour project, he helped Tony Blair win the party leadership in 1994 and ran Labour’s successful general election campaign in 1997.

Blair rewarded Mandelson with the post of minister without portfolio, a roving commission which gave him enormous power over the government machine.

However, the personal frailties – and the attraction to money – which would later bring about his downfall led to his resignation after barely a year when he failed to declare a loan from a cabinet colleague whose business dealings Mandelson’s own department was investigating.

Advertisement

After a year on the backbenches licking his wounds, Blair brought him back into the cabinet as Northern Ireland secretary the following year, at the time a key role as the peace process faltered.

But once again, barely a year later, Mandelson was forced to resign, this time for lying about his role in brokering a British passport for a wealthy donor to the Millennium Dome project.

After famously declaring he was “a fighter, not a quitter” when retaining his Hartlepool seat in 2001, Mandelson stood down as an MP in 2004 to become a European trade commissioner, a post he held until he made another dramatic political comeback in 2008.

Gordon Brown, who had succeeded Blair the previous year, stunned Westminster by making Mandelson – his New Labour nemesis – a life peer and appointing him business secretary and de facto deputy prime minister.

Advertisement

He finally left frontline politics, apparently for good, when Labour lost the 2010 general election.

Ex-Prime Minister and Labour Party leader, Gordon Brown, right, and then-Business Secretary Peter Mandelson react as they speak to the media about economy in a press conference in London, Monday, April 19, 2010.
Ex-Prime Minister and Labour Party leader, Gordon Brown, right, and then-Business Secretary Peter Mandelson react as they speak to the media about economy in a press conference in London, Monday, April 19, 2010.

How Did Mandelson Come Back Into Government?

Despite his complete lack of diplomatic experience, Mandelson was appointed the UK’s ambassador to Washington a year ago.

He quickly established a rapport with President Donald Trump and was a key figure in negotiations on a UK/US trade deal and technology partnership.

Mandelson also helped to smooth over American concerns around the UK government’s decision to hand sovereignty over the strategically-important Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

Advertisement

His return to the heart of British politics was seen as a reward for his years of behind-the-scenes work with Morgan McSweeney – now Starmer’s chief of staff – to help return Labour to government.

McSweeney is known to have pushed the PM to give Mandelson the ambassador’s role, a judgement call which has intensified calls from Labour MPs for him to be sacked.

What Was Mandelson’s Relationship To Epstein?

The nature of their friendship has come out in drips and drabs over the years. Here’s a breakdown of what is currently public knowledge – and when it was first revealed.

Advertisement

June 2023

A Financial Times report from June 2023 unveiled how an internal JP Morgan report, dating back to 2019, noted Epstein’s “particularly close relationship with Prince Andrew the Duke of York and Lord Peter Mandelson, a senior member of the British government”.

The report was commissioned to shed light on JPMorgan’s 15-year relationship with Epstein and refers to a range of meetings between the disgraced financier and Mandelson.

The dossier also found Mandelson had stayed at Epstein’s lavish townhouse in Manhatten when he was the UK’s business secretary while the convicted criminal was in prison for soliciting underage sex from a minor.

Advertisement
In this image provided by the New York State Sex Offender Registry, Jeffrey Epstein has his photo taken March 28, 2017.
In this image provided by the New York State Sex Offender Registry, Jeffrey Epstein has his photo taken March 28, 2017.

February 2025

Mandelson was appointed as US ambassador in February last year, after going through routine due diligence and security vetting.

When asked about his Epstein connection by the Financial Times’ George Parker during an extensive interview, the former Labour cabinet minister said: “I regret ever meeting him or being introduced to him by his partner Ghislaine Maxwell.”

Maxwell is currently in prison for recruiting and trafficking underaged girls for the financier.

Mandelson added: “I regret even more the hurt he caused to many young women.”

Advertisement

However, according to the FT report, “an icy chill” then descended during their conversation on the train, and Mandelson added: “I’m not going to go into this. It’s an FT obsession and frankly you can all fuck off. OK?”

When later asked about Mandelson’s language, the prime minister’s spokesperson told reporters: “The prime minister has made clear the expertise and the experience Lord Mandelson has in relation to becoming ambassador to the US.”

September 2025

The seeds of Mandelson’s political demise were sown last autumn, when US lawmakers released a tranche of documemts relating to Epstein.

Advertisement

They included a “birthday book” which contained a message from Mandelson in which he described Epstein as his “best pal”.

But it was a further revelation, that Mandelson told Epstein in an email that “your friends stay with you and love you” even as he was facing child underage sex charges in 2008, that proved to be the final straw.

Despite telling MPs that he had “confidence” in his ambassador, Starmer eventually sacked Mandelson, just seven months after appointing him.

“The emails show that the depth and extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment,” the Foreign Office said.

Advertisement
President Donald Trump, left and former UK ambassador to the United States Peter Mandelson, in the Oval Office.
President Donald Trump, left and former UK ambassador to the United States Peter Mandelson, in the Oval Office.

January 2026

Despite being sacked in disgrace, Mandelson appeared poised to make another remarkable comeback thanks to a series of high-profile media appearances at the start of this year.

They included an interview on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, the BBC’s flagship political programme.

However, he caused outrage when he failed to apologise to Epstein’s victims, saying only that he was sorry “for a system” which did not listen to victims’ voices.

“That system gave him protection but not them,” he said. “If I had not known, or if I was in any way complicit or culpable, of course I would apologise for it.”

Advertisement

After an angry backlash, Mandelson rowed back the following day, saying: “I did not want to be held responsible for his [Epstein’s] crimes of which I was ignorant, not indifferent, because of the lies he told me and so many others.

“I was wrong to believe him following his conviction and to continue my association with him afterwards. I apologise unequivocally for doing so to the women and girls who suffered.”

February 2026

A new tranche of documents from the US’s Department of Justice (DoJ) came out at the start of February and finally sealed Mandelson’s fate.

Advertisement

They appeared to show he had accepted $75,000 from the disgraced financier between 2003 and 2004, though Mandelson has said he has no recollection of receiving those payments and did not know if the documents were genuine.

But amid mounting public anger, he announced he was quitting the Labour Party to avoid “further embarrassment” last Sunday.

The scandal has only intensified since then, with Mandelson now facing a criminal investigation over allegations he passed market sensitive information to Epstein when he was business secretary and the government was dealing with the aftermath of the global financial crash.

Responding to the revelations, Starmer said Mandelson had “betrayed” Britain.

Advertisement

Other emails show Mandelson and Epstein sharing crude jokes when the latter was released from prison – an occasion described as “Liberation Day” by the peer.

Lord Mandelson described Jeffrey Epstein’s release after he served his sentence for child sex offences as ‘Liberation Day!’

Mandelson asked Epstein how they should celebrate

Epstein responded with a crude joke about two strippers: ‘With grace and modesty (these are the names of… pic.twitter.com/i4WuDmP5ZK

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) February 4, 2026

Advertisement

How Has Mandelson Responded?

Mandelson announced last Tuesday that he was quitting the House of Lords, although it will require a special law to be passed to formally remove his title.

In a self-pitying interview with The Times carried out before the latest revelations, he tried to portray himself as a victim over his sacking as US ambassador.

“It was like a 5.30am drive-by shooting,” he said. “I was at the edge of something. Suddenly, I was put at the centre of it — as a result of historical emails of which I have no memory and no record.”

Advertisement

Suggesting he still had a contribution to make to British politics, he said: “Hiding under a rock would be a disproportionate response to a handful of misguided historical emails, which I deeply regret sending.

“If it hadn’t been for the emails, I’d still be in Washington. Emails sent all those years ago didn’t change the relationship that I had with this monster.

“I feel the same about the recent download of Epstein files, none of which indicate wrongdoing or misdemeanour on my part.”

What Happens Next?

Advertisement

After a Labour rebellion, the government has agreed to publish all documents relating Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador.

It’s thought there could be close to 100,000 government files related to the former Labour peer.

The police inquiry into Mandelson is also likely to continue for months, if not years, drawing out the political pain for Starmer and his government.

Scotland Yard confirmed on Friday they are searching two properties in their investigation, but Mandelson has not been “arrested and enquiries are ongoing”.

Advertisement

What Does This Mean For Starmer?

Questions about Starmer’s judgment – which was already in doubt after a slew of government U-turns – have only intensified over the Mandelson scandal.

While the PM says he was lied to by Mandelson, his critics say the warning signs were already there long before the decision was taken to send him to Washington.

Harriet Harman, for the former Labour deputy leader and a party loyalist, told the Electoral Dysfunction podcast: “He’s got to stop blaming Mandelson and saying ‘he lied to me’ because actually he should never have been considering him in the first place.

Advertisement

“And to say ‘he lied to me’ makes it look weak and naive and gullible. So it’s just completely the wrong thing.”

She added: “If he doesn’t take the path which is necessary, yes, this will finish him off and that will be a tragedy for the government, a tragedy for the country and tragedy for Keir Starmer.”

Mutinous Labour MPs believe Morgan McSweeney’s sacking is a necessary first step in repairing the huge political damage caused by the Mandelson scandal.

However, questions about Starmer’s own future continue to swirl, and are only likely to intensify in the days ahead.

Advertisement

One MP told HuffPost UK: “Taking refuge in constituency stuff this weekend seems appealing.

“But trying to pretend it’s all a bad dream for a few days won’t work, as constituents will be taking the chance to make very clear how they feel about Starmer and Mandelson and that’ll end up feeding into things back in parliament next week.”

While his rivals sharpen their knives, Starmer tried to win back public favour by issuing a frank apology on Thursday, telling Epstein’s victims he’s “sorry” for ever believing Mandelson.

Will it be enough to save him, or is this scandal going to bring him down?

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Caption Contest (For Pete’s Sake Edition)

Published

on

Caption Contest (For Pete’s Sake Edition)

Entries in the comments…

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Margot Robbie ’s necklace exposes a colonial reality we still ignore

Published

on

Margot Robbie ’s necklace exposes a colonial reality we still ignore

On the red carpet at the premiere of Wuthering Heights – Australian actress Margot Robbie, when asked about her stunning necklace made two glaringly inaccurate statements.

Firstly, Robbie legitimises the ownership of the jewel to Hollywood:

It’s Elizabeth Taylor’s necklace. It is the Taj Mahal diamond that Richard Burton gave it to her… there is something kind of Cathy and Heathcliff about Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor in my mind.

Then, reaching for an older origin, she called the history of the necklace “amazing,” musing that it belonged to “the woman whose grave is the Taj Mahal” — pointing not toward the powerful Empress Nur Jahan (1577–1645) who actually owned it, but to her more romantically memorialised stepdaughter, Mumtaz Mahal, who is indeed buried there.

The film has been accused of whitewashing Heathcliff — erasing his possible Romani or Black identity from the book to fit a palatable Hollywood romance.

Advertisement

While the BBC is busy rescuing the film’s image by explaining away the backlash as passionate fandom or bold reinterpretation; maybe it’s time to stop watering down these criticisms.

Margot Robbie — whitewashing the Origin Story

Margot Robbie’s reply about the necklace shows just how successful Operation Legacy was.

Declassified British files reveal that Operation Legacy was the systematic, state-ordered destruction of thousands of “dirty” colonial documents in the 1950s and 60s. Lorries carried files to incinerators; crates of secrets were sunk at sea. In the words of a 2013 report, officials were desperate to consign atrocities and their paper trails to history, leaving successors and subjects in the dark.

It is not a stretch to imply that the history of the imperial loot of the diamond was buried with Operation Legacy.

Advertisement

The exact path of how the necklace left colonial India and entered the vaults of Cartier remains unclear, a gap in the record that itself speaks to the opaque channels of colonial extraction.

After being acquitted by Cartier in 1972, the jewel entered the orbit of Elizabeth Taylor through her then husband. It was later sold at auction in 2011 for a record $8.8 million to an anonymous bidder.

Again, Christie’s auction house narrative also conveniently omits the Western acquisition, whilst exoticising the Mughal past.

An academic study of 19th century British press notes that:

Advertisement

Throughout imperial rule, both textual and illustrated newspapers produced reports and cultural representations of India, and more specifically its rulers, that highlighted exoticism and promoted a sense of cultural difference from British readers, subsequently creating an overall image of India that was stereotyped.

Christie’s and Robbie have done the same thing: Romanticising the Mughal past but staying silent about the colonial loot.

Let’s de-exoticise Nur Jahan.

Nur Jahan was politically one of the most important figures of the Mughal Dynasty. Historical and art history research reveals a formidable co-ruler: a skilled hunter depicted loading a musket in androgynous attire. A political strategist who issued coins in her name, and an economic strategist who commanded trade fleets and negotiated with European merchants .

According to a paper:

Maharani Nur Jahan, wife of Emperor Jahangir, was famed for her political intelligence and military skill and played an unrivalled role in ruling the Mughal Era. The Mughals were ardent supporters of art and culture, as seen by their exquisite buildings and distinctive handwriting

Nur Jahan’s stepson, Shah Jahan, would later become famous for building the Taj Mahal in Agra, India, in memory of his wife, Mumtaz Mahal.

Advertisement

But what’s less well-known is that the beautiful white-marble tomb he created was actually inspired by an earlier gem in Agra: the mausoleum Nur Jahan commissioned for her own father, Itimad-ud-Daulah. Often called the “Baby Taj,” her design pioneered the intricate marble inlay and graceful proportions that would define the Taj Mahal itself.

Nur Jahan died in 1645 and is buried in Lahore, a city she helped beautify, alongside her husband Jahangir.

Nur Jahan’s legacy is still alive today across both India and Pakistan — in Lahore, where she’s buried, and in Agra where she first set marble and gems into poetry.

That shared history deserves better than the watered-down, exotic story we’ve been handed. It’s time for both countries to reclaim her — not as some romantic side character, but as the powerhouse she truly was a ruler, a hunter, and a builder.

Advertisement

Other Loot

It’s the same story playing out on a larger scale in British establishments.

The Koh-i-Noor diamond — seized by the British East India Company from a 10-year-old Punjabi Maharaja in 1849 — still sits in the Imperial State Crown, glittering in the Tower of London.

The swords and jewels of Tipu Sultan, looted after he was killed defending his fortress of Srirangapatna in 1799, still lie behind glass at the Victoria & Albert Museum.

So, while the Indian government made diplomatic noise in 2023 about getting the loot back, the reality in London hasn’t budged. This highlights the colonial dynamic that is still at play.

Advertisement

What Margot Robbie’s comments reveal is a familiar colonial reflex — one Hollywood knows all too well — of laundering imperial theft through re-angling the narrative.

Until colonial extraction is called THEFT, and not just “amazing history,” empire remains alive and well.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Your Party blocks Sultana group member from oversight committee

Published

on

Your Party blocks Sultana group member from oversight committee

Your Party has allegedly blocked a member of Zarah Sultana’s Grassroots Left slate from sitting on a committee responsible for making sure upcoming internal elections are conducted in a fair manner. This raises concerns because the person was blocked by a senior member of Jeremy Corbyn’s opposing slate, The Many. It raises questions about just how real democracy is in the new party.

Your Party elections

Your Party is currently gearing up for its upcoming Central Executive Committee (CEC) elections on 26 February.

This marks a crucial step in establishing the new political party’s structures. These elections are integral to enabling branches across the country to formally constitute, allowing them to organise effectively and campaign on local and national issues within their communities. However, recent revelations appear to confirm members’ concerns that socialism and genuine democracy are inconvenient obstacles for those who currently hold the reins – and the party’s resources.

Verified evidence seen by the Canary raises serious concerns that Jeremy Corbyn is allowing ally Karie Murphy to exert undue control over internal democratic processes. Far from uniting socialists as promised, these developments appear to confirm long-held fears that grassroots members are being frozen out unless they belong to ‘Jeremy’s team’.

Advertisement

Socialist? BLOCKED

Originally, members of Your Party made it clear that they wanted an elected oversight committee formed ahead of the CEC election. Supporters argued that this approach would make committee members more representative of the entire membership, bridging divides and differences of opinion.

However, figures on The Many slate allegedly objected, instead pushing for – and implementing – a sortition process that selected five members to carry out crucial oversight. Given the public bickering and clashes driven by strong views on both sides, members generally accepted this compromise as fair in principle.

However, it now appears that principle and process are not the priority for those gearing the party’s democratic processes.

The Canary has been told that Karie Murphy exclude one sortition member from being involved in the Your Party committee, literally blocking her number and ignoring her very existence.

Advertisement

One Your Party member who wished to remain anonymous told the Canary:

This blatant and arrogant power-move by Murphy has now confirmed prior reports received that those with the reins are only happy with members having a say, if you are firmly loyal to their camp alone. Once again, actions by figures within the party suggest a failure to learn from past mistakes, calling into question whether they possess the principles and resolve needed to confront the far right and unite, rather than divide, and empower the communities they claim to represent.

Access denied in Your Party

The Your Party sortition member has requested to remain anonymous. Also worth noting sortition members are usually meant to be anonymous to ensure safeguarding of democratic processes and efficient electoral oversight. Her experience went as follows:

When I was called by Karie Murphy a few weeks ago I actually ignored the call the first time, I’d become accustomed to doing that trying to avoid debt collectors asking for payments I can’t make.

But when I didn’t recognise the number I decided to call back immediately. The woman on the phone explained to me that I had been sortitioned as part of the selection process for a Your Party Election oversight committee. The woman said I would be required to attend regular meetings with MPs supporting Jeremy Corbyn such as Adam Shockat.

I remained quiet during her brief pause which I only assume she expected I’d fill with some line about how I’m ‘a big fan’. I was a big fan, but that’s not true anymore, Corbyn’s no socialist and he’d proven which class he really stands with time and again. Her mention of Adam Shockat the sexist and Jeremy Corbyn only reminded me of what I’d be up against, but I knew I couldn’t let this opportunity pass. I told this woman, who I later learned was actually Karie Murphy, that I was in regular attendance at YP meetings and that this could be great because I could get the input of a wider part of the membership.

Advertisement

Similarly to my holding back at the mention of Corbyn and Shockat, Murphy remained quiet. Nonetheless, I knew she couldn’t backtrack now that I had been offered the position, I thought.

I told her I was wanting to accept the offer and that this was really important to me. Immediately she responded with asking what I did for a living, when I mentioned my job role she said it may be difficult for me to get permission at work. I knew that my job would in no way be related to or jeopardised by a position on an election oversight committee and that any request made to my employer would just be a matter of procedure. This was so important to me that I would have risked my job to be given the opportunity to just mirror the voices of highly experienced and well qualified activists I’ve met since becoming involved within Your Party.

I asked to be sent the information and confirm my interest, the woman told me that she was waiting for someone else to send her the information first but would then be in contact with me the next day to send over the details and officially confirm my interest. I immediately spoke to my Trade union rep after the phone call, he confirmed with me that this would not conflict with my job but I would be required to make a formal request with the key details. The next day I waited but heard nothing back, no emails, no phone calls, no messages.

After two weeks someone told me that the elections oversight committee were set to meet. I had started to question whether the whole thing was still going ahead, I knew the majority of members initially had wanted the committee to be elected.

Advertisement

I was confused, I hadn’t seen any emails but double checked all of my folders to be sure. I double checked my call log and messages but there was nothing that I’d been sent. Confused, as I was meant to have been sortitioned for this committee, I decided to ring the person who rang me two weeks earlier. User busy.

I then messaged the person asking for the details and received no response. Having gotten nowhere, I later asked a friend to try calling the phone number for me and somehow she was able to get through to this Scottish woman who we later realised was Karie Murphy. Karie Murphy who after learning I would lean far too left for the politics of Corbyn and ‘The Many’, blocked my number and banked on the left to be disorganised enough to be able to get away with it. Well we’re not, and we won’t let them get away with it.

This is why Democracy is important, these MPs ultimately want to dampen your impact in order to protect their own interests, shape their own policies and we are getting in the way.

The GL in YP are the only players on the board offering any real solution against rising wealth inequality, unemployment, rise of fascism, cuts to welfare at home. And that’s because they are the only real players capable of delivering on their promises; decentralised power, MPs held accountable, no more going back on manifestos because it’s not them who decide policies, it’s us.

Advertisement

Ultimately people need to understand that this is again another story of class war, a group of MPs trying to hold onto their wealth , and therefore means of power, will ultimately never act in our interests and this time the cost is too high.

We should have expected it with Labour, we can expect it with Greens and we will do everything in our power to oppose it in ‘The Many’ by forming the party as in the vision of YP GL, Democratic, Grassroots and transformational, in short, a party truly shaped by the many, not just a small group of elite MPs claiming to speak for us.

The GL of YP are the only real players in British politics right now capable of stopping the loss of lives the Global South, and then eventually we, will face if we reach the point of no return in terms of the climate crisis. By exiting Britain out of NATO, ending its funding of imperialism and genocide as well as, crucially, ending its role in the exploitation of the Global south, Your Party could start a possible chain reaction that might lead to the spread of socialism in Europe. I don’t think we can ignore that possibility especially given the current level of working class organisation we are seeing.

We know that the climate question can’t be solved while the global capitalist system continues. The overconsumption is choking us.

Advertisement

I think it’s important to keep an eye on the climate because I don’t want my family in the global south to die right now but I also know that there is nowhere to run, I am aware of the eventual cost to life we will face here and worse with the threat of AI, under the current system, the working class risks being nothing more than an inconvenience to have around, and what power would the workers have then in the absence of work. We will be cattle in a slaughterhouse.

No smoke without fire

The Canary contacted Your Party for comment on the issues raised in this article. However, we did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Another Your Party insider close to the project has also spoken to the Canary and confirmed:

It became very personalised. If you didn’t show total loyalty to Jeremy being the sole leader, he and the people around him basically, they won’t work with you.

This raises urgent, unavoidable questions for Jeremy Corbyn and his team. Members say they have had enough of anti-democratic practices and the old tactics of Labour-right. After years of watching establishment parties impose top-down control, they surely did not come together to replicate the very model they set out to challenge. True democracy is the only cure to fascism.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump’s Backpedaling In Minneapolis

Published

on

Trump’s Backpedaling In Minneapolis

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”b5c84d48-e0ff-4d76-9931-dc323e407cea”}).render(“69862e94e4b0ddd03033211a”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

police raid Mandelson’s properties in Epstein hit

Published

on

police raid Mandelson's properties in Epstein hit

Police have raided two properties belonging to disgraced former Starmer adviser Peter Mandelson as part of their investigation into misconduct in public office and insider trading.

Mandelson resigned from Labour and the House of Lords after details of his leaks of sensitive government and financial information to serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein were exposed by the latest Epstein file release.

Keir Starmer is currently hiding behind Epstein’s victims to avoid disclosing records showing what he knew of Mandelson’s misconduct before appointing him as adviser and ambassador to the US. Despite, or because of, the cynical exploitation of Epstein’s child victims, Starmer’s hold on power is rapidly slipping.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Guardiola turns the tables and lectures the press

Published

on

Guardiola turns the tables and lectures the press

Pep Guardiola’s press conference was not a routine preview of a Manchester City match. Nor was it about tactics, results, or team selection. What happened was something else entirely.

The coach, known for teaching football with philosophical rigour, stepped off the pitch and asked a painful question about an entire profession: why is the press silent? Guardiola, synonymous with modern football and his historic partnership with Lionel Messi at Barcelona, did not shed his role as a coach. Instead, he expanded it.

Guardiola’s press conference a place for reflection

In a moment that felt sincere and unplanned, the press conference turned into a space for reflection when a journalist asked him:

Why do these issues matter so much to you?

Guardiola smiled, then replied with frustration:

Advertisement

I appreciate this question, because in ten years — or even the last two — this is the first time a journalist has asked me that. It’s as if talking about these issues isn’t allowed in your work. I don’t know.

This was not a throwaway comment. It exposed a deep failure in media practice, especially when compared to coverage of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Then, sports press conferences became political platforms overnight. Players and coaches were routinely asked for political positions. No one complained about “politicising sport”. Neutrality vanished — but only in one direction.

Now, Guardiola speaks against that selective silence. He is not defending himself, but protesting the lack of scrutiny around Israel’s war of extermination in Palestine, which has killed more than 70,000 civilians and destroyed the foundations of life. That silence extends beyond Gaza. It reaches Sudan, where war has displaced millions, and a global climate fuelled by racism and hate against migrants.

Guardiola’s criticism was not aimed at one journalist. It was directed at an entire media system hiding behind the idea of “separating sport from politics”.

Advertisement

That principle has been used to ignore crimes and violations — particularly those committed by Israel — while athletes who express solidarity with Palestine face smears, silencing, and symbolic punishment. This has happened to figures such as Anwar Ghazi, Noussair Mazraoui, and Ons Jabeur.

Sports journalism is not light entertainment or a harmless supplement. It is journalism. It carries responsibility, accountability, and a duty to side with humanity against systems of oppression. Yet many outlets choose safety. They rebrand silence as “sportsmanship” and neutrality as morality. The irony is that these institutions fully understand the power of sport. FIFA president Gianni Infantino once called football “global magic”.

That magic becomes dangerous when it escapes the approved script.

Once again, Guardiola left the pitch — not to explain a game plan or an injury — but to offer a lesson:

Never before in human history has information been so visible. What’s happening in Palestine, Ukraine, Russia, Sudan. When I see these images, I feel pain. That’s why I will do everything I can to help build a better society.

This was not a political speech. It was a reminder of journalism’s most basic duty: to see, to ask, and to refuse silence.

Advertisement

This time, the journalists found themselves back in training — while the football manager reminded them of their job.

Featured image via Youtube

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Green Party is right when it says ‘abolish landlords’. Here’s why.

Published

on

Green Party is right when it says 'abolish landlords'. Here's why.

YouGov polling from February 2026 shows 78% of the UK public support rent controls. But why regulate a scam when you can get rid of it? That’s what the Green Party is proposing.

The Green Party position

The Green Party has rent nailed in their “Abolish Landlords” policy, which was successfully voted on at their conference in 2025. The motion read:

The Private Rental Sector has failed, it is a vehicle for wealth extraction, funnelling money from Renters to the Landlord Class. This motion makes it clear Green Party policy is to seek the effective abolition of Private Landlordism.

The Green Party believes that secure, affordable Housing is a Human Right, and that a core goal for a Green Government and Green MPs is to create a fairer housing market.

The Green Party believes the existence of Private Landlords adds no positive value to the economy or society, that the relationship between Landlord and Tenant is inherently and intrinsically extractive and exploitative. That the Private Rented Sector exists to transfer wealth from the working classes to Landlords.

The Green Party believes that the Private Sector has fundamentally failed, and is continuing to fail to provide secure and affordable housing fit for working people.

Advertisement

The thing is, the Green Party wants to move towards social housing, which is essentially state landlordism. While it provides money for the government, people already pay council tax. Social rent is like an additional tax on housing.

Instead, home ownership should be provided through affordable monthly payments for the baseline cost of the resources and expertise that it took for the house to be built. ‘Cost price’ housing should be the aim, not just rent controls or social housing.

Housing bubble

Currently, there is a housing bubble propped up by the super rich buying properties as ‘assets’ while supply is starved off through a lack of building. The governing party is doing even worse than the Green Party’s plans through pledging to provide 1.2% of their housebuilding programme as social or ‘affordable’.

Plus, Common Wealth warned in February 2025 that Labour’s housebuilding programme risks being dominated by private equity firms charging eye-watering rents in the Build to Rent sector.

Advertisement

The thinktank pointed out that Build to Rent properties in the UK have increased to 20% of all new builds in recent years.

As the Green Party rightly points out, the relationship between landlords and tenants is “inherently… exploitative”. But we can do better than state landlordism and rent controls.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Hindutva supremacists lecture UK government on Islamophobia

Published

on

Hindutva supremacists lecture UK government on Islamophobia

It shouldn’t shock anyone that an organisation whose founder and director publicly wrote, “Hinduism is the father of all religions. Islam is a bad copy. Islam is against humanity”, is opposed to defining and addressing anti-Muslim hate. What might shock some is that this organisation, Hindu Council UK (HCUK), has the ear of mainstream media outlets like The Telegraph and has the audacity to “warn” the government about how to approach Islamophobia.

Hindutva is migrating across the globe from India

A recent academic investigation called ‘Seeing the Sangh’ has laid out a comprehensive map of the ‘largest far-right network in history’.  This refers to the organisational complex that centres on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), India’s dominant group promoting Hindutva ideology, otherwise known as Hindu supremacy or Hindu nationalism.

Hindu supremacy and accompanying anti-Muslim hatred have been exported across the world with devastating effects from cultural soft power to political lobbying to violence. I monitor this closely, and founded Hindus for Human Rights UK (HfHR UK) to help fight Hindutva, caste, and bigotry in the British diaspora.

Not only does Hindutva politics now exist in many countries — notably the UK, the USA, Canada, and Australia — it collaborates with other extremist movements in those countries, with Islamophobia forming the common ground between otherwise strange bedfellows.  The Hindutva movement was complicit in the UK’s 2024 racist pogroms; its proponents engage positively with the likes of Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Geert Wilders; neo-Nazi mass murderer Anders Breivik was an admirer of Hindutva.

Advertisement

Hindu Council UK and the bigotry of its leadership

‘Seeing the Sangh’ identifies 2,500 organisations that make up the global RSS network, or Sangh Parivar (RSS family), 26 of which are in the UK. Writer-activist Amrit Wilson explains in Byline Times that the “Hindu right has systematically set up, or taken over, a host of organisations in the UK.” including the Hindu Council UK, founded in 1994 by one Anil Bhanot.

Bhanot has published op-eds in the Guardian, been covered widely in mainstream media, and held unique positions like Hindu Chaplain in the Royal Navy and Hindu Advisor to the Ministry of Defence. Yet, in 2024 Bhanot was stripped of his OBE for “bringing the honours system into disrepute” with his Islamophobia.

In 2021 Bhanot posted extreme anti-Muslim and Hindu supremacist tweets (now deleted), describing himself as “Hindutva” and asserting that “Islam is a religion of violence.”  He went on, “Islam’s dawah is an evil tenet and the sooner it’s legislated against in parliament the better. It turns muslims into Shaitans, as in love Jihad too.”  Love jihad is an Islamophobic conspiracy theory.  Bhanot summed up: “Hinduism is the father of all religions. Islam is a bad copy. Islam is against humanity” and an “invasion into minds”.

Bhanot brazenly defended his hate speech by saying:

Advertisement

I did not do anything wrong and I have not put the honours system into disrepute.  Free speech is a thing of the past now in England.  I am quite upset about it.

Grotesquely, his now-stripped OBE was awarded for “community cohesion”.  National Secular Society writes:

HCUK has been highly vocal in its opposition to anti-caste discrimination law. In 2017 its then-director of interfaith relations Anil Bhanot claimed that attempts to outlaw caste discrimination via the Equality Act were a “vengeful” act of Dalits (the bottom tier of the Hindu caste system) stemming from animosity towards ‘higher castes’.

To abuse one’s senior position at a public-facing organisation to gaslight and block legislation that would protect Dalits is indefensible.

HCUK “warning” the government against Islamophobia definition

But Hindu Council UK is not dissuaded by the indefensible. Despite their director’s far-right diatribe and unashamed Islamophobia, HCUK thought it appropriate to write a letter to the Communities Secretary about Islamophobia, “warning” against: creating a “chilling effect” on free speech; helping to reintroduce blasphemy laws, and; suppressing criticism of Islam.

Five organisations, including HfHR UK, responded.

Advertisement

The Hindu Council UK’s letter to the government stated that:

Freedom of expression includes the right to offend, to challenge and to criticise ideas, indeed Hinduism encourages intellectual debates that has made it robust.

We therefore question why Hindu Council UK is trying, through the Hindu Manifesto for example, to make it illegal to:

accus[e] those who organise around anti-Hindu hate of being agents or pawns of violent, political agendas.

We believe that this “accusation”, though it may be found offensive by some, belongs well within the realm of freedom of expression, the right to offend, and the right to criticise ideas.

No one should be surprised that HCUK is trying to control the discourse around a form of hate — Islamophobia — that its leadership espouses. But why would The Telegraph amplify this malicious lobbying and uncritically parrot the line that HCUK represents all British Hindus?

Advertisement

Demonopolising British Hindu representation

Just as Hindu Council UK attempts to position itself as the voice of all British Hindus, the Telegraph article in question is titled, “Hindus warn Labour against ‘chilling’ Islamophobia definition”, reducing the diversity of the one million-plus Hindus in this country down to the views of a single, bigoted group. This is an insult to British Hindus of conscience.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by this either given The Telegraph’s tendency, along with other right-wing entities, to produce anti-Muslim narratives.  My request to The Telegraph to publish a response to their coverage went unanswered, so HfHR UK and four other organisations co-published our response in FORSEA.

We face an uphill battle as the British Hindu voice has long been captured by supremacist, anti-Muslim bigots, and some mainstream publications are only too ready to amplify them.  HCUK is just one part of the UK’s Hindutva lobby, accompanied by Hindu Forum of Britain, National Hindu Students’ Forum, the VHP UK, and many more.

But there is an extensive network of resistance too — our joint response to the HCUK’s “warning” demonstrates the resolve of our five organisations, a small section of the landscape. The monopolistic control over Hindu advocacy that Hindutva groups have enjoyed in this country for years is coming to a close as progressive alternatives like HfHR UK are drawing in British Hindus by the day.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Single People Are ‘Solo Honeymooning’: Trend Explained

Published

on

Single People Are 'Solo Honeymooning': Trend Explained

I’m going to be honest: I find travelling with other people pretty draining.

There’s the compromise. There’s constantly being “on”. There’s the horrifying prospect of someone you love seeing you at your post-airport worst, and the nightmarish possibility of being expected to talk on a plane.

So I’ll admit I’m sympathetic with TikTok’s “solo honeymoon” trend, which cuts arguments, different itineraries, and “active vs resting” holiday discrepancies completely out of the question.

Instead, “solo honeymooners” – often single people who are sick of waiting ’til they find a spouse to enjoy their dream honeymoon – are taking matters into their own hands.

Advertisement

Here, experts from TrustedHousesitters shared how to achieve the perfect one.

What is a “solo honeymoon”?

It’s basically booking a holiday by yourself, but the term seems to have helped some TikTokers to navigate the feelings and motives behind solo travel.

In one video, an app user said she’s calling her trip to Bali a solo honeymoon because “while I’m not married to a human being, I am kind of married to my work”.

Advertisement

She decided to give herself a break after closing an important business project.

Yet another person said they were “travelling to a honeymoon destination as a very single person” because “you don’t have to wait until you’re in a relationship to go somewhere”.

He added, “I never thought I’d be here single, but here I am”.

“Let’s normalise single people taking themselves on a honeymoon,” a separate video stated.

Advertisement

Commenters often said they wish they’d felt OK doing something like that sooner. “I should’ve done this after I finished my master’s degree,” an app user wrote: “You have no idea how you have encouraged me to do let go of the fear and do this,” another stated.

And in response to a TikToker’s video about taking a safari trip for her “solo honeymoon,” a commenter wrote, “This was my honeymoon idea, and now I’m like F it I need to go.”

How can I plan a “solo honeymoon”?

Trusted Housesitter advised people seeking a “solo honeymoon” to consider the following:

Advertisement
  1. Checking flight times: “For those who love sitting back for a long time with a book, make the most of the solo flying time and travel long haul, but if you’re a little more on the nervous side, choose a shorter, familiar route to start your me-moon stress-free.”
  2. Checking the area’s safety: “Make sure to research ahead and make sure where you head to has good contact points.”
  3. Planning activities in advance: “Many activities are designed for couples or groups. So make sure you won’t face extra costs, and don’t be deterred if something is marketed primarily to pairs or groups; you can still participate and enjoy the experience.”
  4. Not worrying about others’ expectations: “Plan activities that support your own well-being. Whether it’s spa treatments, meditation sessions, hiking, or simply time to read and reflect, tailor your itinerary around what makes you feel recharged and happy.”
  5. Choosing accommodation carefully: “Think about the type of place you want to stay and whether it will enhance your self-care.”

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Epstein files show how Steve Bannon sought to influence Europe

Published

on

Epstein files show how Steve Bannon sought to influence Europe

One of child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein’s many roles was as a powerbroker and connector of far-right and fascist individuals globally. Messages now show how former Trump advisor Steve Bannon sought the sex-trafficker and paedophile’s help to support the European far-right.

The Irish Times reported on 5 February:

The messages mostly date from 2018 and 2019, when Bannon, after being sacked by Trump, regularly visited Europe in his quest to forge a movement in the European Parliament uniting ultra-right wing and Eurosceptic forces from several countries including Italy, Germany, France, Hungary, Poland, Sweden and Austria.

Italy’s Matteo Salvini and France’s Marine Le Pen, both leaders of far-right and fascist-adjacent political parties, were among those Bannon wanted to see flourish:

Bannon especially set his sights on Matteo Salvini, the Italian deputy prime minister and leader of the far-right League party, who at the time was at the height of his political power.

Opposition parties in Italy have called for investigations:

Advertisement

to clarify whether Epstein influenced the rise of the League after Salvini’s name was cited several times in messages exchanged between Bannon and Epstein.

But it wasn’t just Italy…

European far-right empire and Steve Bannon

Much the same process happened in France, left-wing party La France Insoumise has now called:

for a cross-party parliament inquiry after several French figures, including Jack Lang, a former minister for culture, and his daughter appeared in the latest Epstein trove

The vast trove of Epstein file also featured:

exchanges between Epstein and Bannon in which Bannon spoke of his desire to raise money for the far-right leader Marine Le Pen.

Germany was also effected. Messages to Epstein showed how Steve Bannon sought to promote the  far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD):

Advertisement

In texts from 2018, Bannon bragged about his influence as an “adviser” to the new right-wing populists and saw the parties’ gains in Europe as a chance to use them to his and Epstein’s benefit.

The files show:

Epstein’s interest in European nationalists.

While a message from March 2019, just before the EU elections, has Bannon saying he is:

 focused on raising money for Le Pen and Salvini so they can actually run full slates.

Epstein courted and engaged with figures from both liberal – Peter Mandelson being a case in point – and conservative global elites. But his own politics were those of a far-right Zionist. On many occasions the files show how the billionaire sex predator had an interest in helping some of the most extreme political forces in the world in their bids for power.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025