Since the local elections, the key political question in the UK has been, ‘When will the Labour leader go?’. Notably, that’s when, not if, because let’s face it, the writing has been on the wall for Keir Starmer for some time now.

While Labour has obsessed over itself, the Green Party has been working to get things done. In aid of this, the Green’s new mayors and MP Carla Denyer have put the following to the government:

Our mayoral, council and Senedd campaigns were rooted in fighting to end the housing affordability crisis, and voters have spoken. We need action to end rip-off rents now.

So newly elected Green Mayors @ZoeGarbett and @LiamShrivastava alongside Carla Denyer MP have written to… pic.twitter.com/B7l9WF7YVu

Advertisement

— The Green Party (@TheGreenParty) May 12, 2026

Labour, ‘This scandal has to end’

The above letter is addressed to Steve Reed. Although Reed is the housing minister, you may be more familiar with his campaign to smear Green Party activists and politicians.

In their letter, they ask Reed to actually get on with his job and deliver for ordinary renters. It reads (emphasis added):

We are writing to you as newly elected Green Mayors, alongside Carla Denyer MP and on behalf of every newly elected and sitting Green Councillor, to request that you take urgent action to end rip-off rents, and include a Rent Controls Bill in the King’s Speech this week.

Spiralling rents are ripping the heart out of our communities. People are being forced to cut back on essentials just to afford a roof over their heads. Young people are being priced out of the areas they grew up in, with schools in London closing as families are pushed out of the city. Teachers, nurses and careworkers cannot afford to live in the boroughs they work in. Renters across the UK now pay on average a third of their wages on rent, the highest level on record.

But whilst renters get poorer, wealth is being funnelled straight into landlords’ pockets. As you will be aware, the government is set to transfer £70 billion to private landlords through housing support between 2024-28. That is six times the amount of money that was spent on affordable homes over the past five years. Housing has become a way to make money, rather than a universal right.

This scandal has to end. If we had frozen rents four years ago, households in Britain would now be saving over £3,300 per year on average.

It’s time to get serious

The letter continues:

The Green Party’s success last week shows that the country is desperate for an urgent and transformative programme to end rip-off Britain, and are angry that your government has failed to deliver. Our mayoral, council and Senedd campaigns were rooted in fighting to end the housing affordability crisis, and voters have spoken.

Keir Starmer has said that a break with the status quo is needed. The King’s Speech is your opportunity to do this by getting behind the Green Party’s longstanding demands for crucial measures to make life affordable for all, starting with rent controls. With food and energy costs set to sky-rocket as a result of the illegal war on Iran, it has never been more critical.

If your government is in any way serious about improving the lives of the 11 million private renters in England, you must commit to introducing rent controls now.

Keir Starmer himself said the status quo cannot stand in his make-or-break speech on Monday, but at this point, we’ve heard it all before.

Starmer in 2020: "We cannot go back to business as usual after this"

Starmer now: ".. every single time in the past we've simply tried to get back to a status quo that didn't work, we can't do the same again"

The same line, 6 years apart. He wants to fool us twice. https://t.co/aieAKqyj4B pic.twitter.com/MsRDJfakyS

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) May 11, 2026

Is change on the horizon?

In the lead up to the local elections, Labour made it clear that the party wouldn’t introduce rent controls. The question is whether the local elections have taught Starmer’s government anything, or whether status quo policies remain the politics of choice.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

!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=8b034f64-513c-4987-b16f-42d6008f7feb”;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”8b034f64-513c-4987-b16f-42d6008f7feb”,”mediaId”:”1675d0f4-2c7a-4a08-acb8-10a79be2d3a6″}).render(“6a0455aee4b0cdaf88dc5d5a”);});

Source link

The Pentagon has publicised the location of a secretive nuclear submarine in a move that can be read as an act of strategic signalling to Iran.

The Ohio-class vessel turned up in Gibraltar, a British colonial possession in the Mediterranean.

US Fleet Forces Command published an image of the unnamed vessel in port on 12 May with the caption:

The port visit demonstrates U.S. capability, flexibility, and continuing commitment to its NATO allies. Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines are undetectable launch platforms for submarine-launched ballistic missiles, providing the U.S. with its most survivable leg of the nuclear triad.

And Navy Lookout posted images of the submarine being towed by tugboats.

US Ohio-class submarine arrived in Gibraltar yesterday, escorted by @RNGibSqn HMS Dagger.

Via @dparody / Ryan Ocana pic.twitter.com/C9nhKEtKBB

— Navy Lookout (@NavyLookout) May 11, 2026

UK outlet, Defence Journal, wrote:

The visit is notable for the fact that it was publicly announced at all as the locations of U.S. nuclear-armed submarines are among the most closely guarded secrets in the American military, and public disclosure of a ballistic missile submarine’s whereabouts is exceptionally rare.

Political website, the Hill, pointed out that the reveal came at a crunch point in the Pakistan-brokered US-Iranian peace deal — “a day after President Trump rejected the latest peace proposal from Iran”.

Its reporter added:

The Pentagon did not disclose the name of the submarine, one of the U.S. military’s most secretive weapons. In general, the locations of U.S. nuclear-armed submarines are highly classified.

Pentagon’s disclosure comes amid crunch talks

The unnamed boat is part of a fleet of Ohio-class vessels with a range of capability, the Hill reported.

The Ohio class is made up of 14 ballistic missiles and four guided missile submarines. The submarines are able to carry Trident II ballistic missiles and can conduct extended deterrence patrols. The guided missile submarines can have more than 150 Tomahawk missiles on board.

Keir Starmer has said he has only involved the UK in defensive measures in the Iran war. Iran has derided that claim and Starmer’s own defence minister has contradicted it too.

The UK announced destroyer HMS Dragon was deployed to help open up the Strait of Hormuz on 11 May. Afterwards, the UK military also announced that a new drone system would be deployed.

A press release said the military package would include:

Advanced autonomous mine hunting equipment, including capabilities to detect and defeat mines.

Additionally:

The Royal Navy’s modular ‘Beehive’ system which can deliver high-speed, autonomous Kraken drone boats allowing the multinational force to sense, track, and identify potential threats and defeat them.

The UK will also send Typhoon fighter jets and mine clearance personnel. The military again claimed the multinational plan was “strictly defensive in nature” and “is designed to restore confidence for commercial shipping” along the strait.

The US and Israel attacked Iran first on 28 February without provocation. Iran was offering unprecedented concessions in negotiations at the time.

The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. The UN’s atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has also said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The US has achieved none of its original war aims. Once attacked, Iran predictably closed the Straits of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, triggering a global energy crisis.

Iran has explicitly said the war will continue until “the enemy’s inevitable and permanent humiliation, disgrace, regret, and surrender”.

Trump came to power on an anti-war ‘America First’ ticket. He now faces worldwide humiliation.

The US’ decision to signal a submarine’s location is very unusual. The fact that the Trump administration has failed in its war objectives, and badly needs an off-ramp, makes the disclosure look desperate. US posturing won’t change the reality of the Iran stalemate.

Featured image via US Navy

By Joe Glenton

Source link

In the NURMI study of European endurance runners, 43% of marathon participants reported regular vitamin supplement use, 34% reported mineral supplement use, and 19% reported carbohydrate or protein supplement use. Most of those products did not change finish times. A small subset did. The aim here is to identify which categories sit on solid evidence for a runner training across a 12 to 20 week block.

Carbohydrates as the Primary Fuel

Carbohydrate availability is the rate-limiting factor in marathon performance after the 90-minute mark. Liver and muscle glycogen stores hold roughly 1,800 to 2,200 calories in a trained runner. Most runners deplete those stores between mile 18 and 22 if they take in nothing during the race. Recommendations for runs longer than 90 minutes call for 40 to 80 grams of carbohydrate per hour, typically as a mixture of glucose and fructose, since the small intestine has separate transporters for the two sugars and a 2:1 glucose-to-fructose ratio raises maximum oxidation rate above the glucose-only ceiling.

Training day carbohydrate intake follows a different logic. Most coaches recommend 6 to 10 grams per kilogram of body weight on heavier mileage days, with intake clustered around the long run. Carbohydrate-only products are useful as race-day fuel and for very long training runs. Outside of those windows, food typically does the work better. Trained athletes who target 90 grams per hour during peak race blocks usually train the gut by progressively raising intake during long runs across the build, since untrained guts often reject high-carbohydrate loads with cramping and nausea.

Electrolytes During Long Sessions

Sweat loss runs 500 to 1,500 milligrams of sodium per hour during sustained running, with substantial person-to-person variation. Salty sweaters, defined as athletes with sweat sodium concentrations above 60 millimoles per liter, can lose more than 2 grams of sodium per hour in heat. Replacing some fraction of that loss matters during runs over 90 minutes and during racing in warm conditions. Female runners on average produce sweat with lower sodium concentration than male runners, though variation within each group is wider than the gap between groups.

A trained runner using electrolyte powders during a long workout typically targets 300 to 700 milligrams of sodium per hour, alongside fluid intake of 400 to 800 milliliters per hour. Potassium, magnesium, and calcium losses through sweat are smaller, and most products include them at fixed ratios. Plain water without sodium replacement during multi-hour sessions raises the risk of dilutional hyponatremia, which is the condition the next section addresses.

Hyponatremia Risk in Endurance Events

A 2002 study of Boston Marathon finishers found that 13% had post-race blood sodium below 135 millimoles per liter, the threshold for hyponatremia. The strongest predictor was body weight gain across the race, which correlates with overdrinking. Hyponatremia symptoms range from nausea and headache to confusion and seizures in the most severe cases. Salt tablets, electrolyte powders, and many sports drinks reduce the risk by replacing sodium during the race instead of relying on water alone. Slower runners face higher risk because they spend more total hours on the course and more total time drinking water at aid stations.

Iron for Endurance Runners

Iron supports hemoglobin synthesis and oxygen transport. Endurance runners lose iron through sweat, gastrointestinal microbleeding, foot strike hemolysis, and menstrual losses in female runners. Studies of endurance running cohorts have documented iron deficiency in runners at rates above 50% in some samples, with female runners affected at higher rates than male runners.

Serum ferritin below 25 nanograms per milliliter is the threshold most sports medicine clinics use as a flag for low stores. Iron supplementation is appropriate only after a blood test confirms low levels. Casual iron use in non-deficient adults can produce gastrointestinal side effects and, in rare cases, iron overload. The dose used in clinical correction is 100 to 200 milligrams of elemental iron daily, taken with vitamin C and away from coffee, tea, and dairy, which limit absorption. Most clinicians retest after eight to twelve weeks to confirm the dose is restoring stores.

Vitamin D and Bone Stress

Bone stress injuries account for roughly 20% of running injuries seen in sports medicine clinics. Calcium and vitamin D are required for bone mineralization. Trials in collegiate athletes have reported reduced stress fracture rates among groups receiving vitamin D supplementation when baseline levels were low. Vitamin D deficiency is common in winter months at higher latitudes, and runners who train mostly indoors or in heavy clothing may not produce enough through sun exposure.

A typical maintenance dose is 1,000 to 2,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily, with higher doses used for correction in deficient athletes. Routine testing once or twice a year is enough for most runners and removes the guesswork. Calcium intake from dairy, fortified plant milks, leafy greens, and tofu supports the same pathway, with most adults needing 1,000 to 1,200 milligrams daily.

Caffeine as a Dose-Dependent Aid

Across meta-analyses of endurance time-trial studies, caffeine in the 3 to 6 milligram per kilogram range produces a 2 to 3% improvement in finishing time compared with placebo, taken roughly 60 minutes before the start. The mechanism is a reduction in perceived effort plus a small effect on fat oxidation. The effect sits at the high end for runners who normally drink little coffee and at the low end for daily heavy users. Side effects include disrupted sleep when caffeine is taken later in the afternoon and gastrointestinal distress when stacked with other stimulants. Studies of coffee before workout timing report similar dose-response patterns, with minimal benefit below 2 milligrams per kilogram.

Race-day topping up with smaller doses every 30 to 45 minutes during the second half of a marathon helps maintain plasma caffeine and may extend the perceived-effort benefit. Total intake on race day usually peaks around 6 milligrams per kilogram, since higher doses produce diminishing returns and a higher rate of side effects without further improvement in finishing time.

Protein for Training-Day Recovery

Endurance athletes need 1.2 to 1.7 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, higher than the sedentary baseline of 0.8 grams per kilogram. Most runners hit this through normal meals if they eat protein at every meal and a snack after the long run. A scoop of whey or plant protein after hard sessions can help elite athletes who struggle to eat solid food in the immediate post-run window. Beyond that, the marginal value of protein products drops fast, and additional intake does not produce additional adaptation. Older runners, runners on calorie-restricted diets, and runners returning from injury can sit at the upper end of the range to support muscle preservation.

Categories With Strong Evidence

Across the published literature, four nutrient categories are well-supported for marathon training. Carbohydrates during runs over 90 minutes. Sodium and other electrolytes during long, hot, or salty-sweat sessions. Iron when blood tests show low ferritin. Vitamin D when serum levels run low and during winter at higher latitudes. Caffeine sits as an optional ergogenic aid with consistent but modest effect sizes. Protein products are a convenience choice rather than a performance lever. Anything outside these categories belongs to a much smaller evidence base, and most of it does not change marathon finish times. A simple test: if a category is not on this list, the runner should expect no measurable benefit from spending money on it.

By Nathan Spears

Source link

Source link

On Wednesday 13 May, the front page of the Telegraph declared the following:

Streeting to confront Starmer

Health Secretary will confront PM over plan ‘to get us out of this mess’ as four ministers resign and list of rebel MPs grows
@Tony_Diver
https://t.co/FluHOSiL2j@Telegraph #frontpagestoday #UK pic.twitter.com/N1SbQV6rlS

— 𝙵𝚛𝚘𝚗𝚝 𝙿𝚊𝚐𝚎𝚜 𝚃𝚘𝚍𝚊𝚢 (@ukpapers) May 13, 2026

Streeting has now arrived at Downing Street to confront Starmer.

Streeting has also left Downing Street.

In total, he was there for just sixteen minutes.

16-minute showdown

The following is a video of Streeting arriving at Downing Street:

WATCH: Wes Streeting arrives in No 10 for his meeting with Keir Starmer on the PM’s future pic.twitter.com/0RUv5OagHQ

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) May 13, 2026

And this is him leaving:

NEW: Wes Streeting leaves Downing Street after just *16 minutes* with PM.
pic.twitter.com/JqgMp5L0ZJ

— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) May 13, 2026

As reported by the Telegraph:

Mr Streeting will ask Sir Keir how he plans to resolve the “turbulence” around his leadership and get Labour out of a “mess”, after the party lost more than 1,000 seats and the control of several English councils to Reform UK.

The fact that Streeting was only there for 16 minutes suggests one of two possible outcomes:

• Starmer has devised a plan so cunningly simple it took mere minutes to assure Streeting all is well.
• Starmer refused to say much of anything.

There’s good reason to think it’s the latter. As Politics UK reported on 12 May:

UPDATE: It's understood Starmer told Cabinet Ministers to raise any concerns with him privately rather than during the meeting

However, it's claimed he then refused to meet them individually

Wes Streeting was among the last to leave No 10 well after other Cabinet members

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) May 12, 2026

Advertisement

Following the Streeting showdown, the Times’ Steven Swinford wrote:

The briefings about the Streeting and Starmer meeting being ‘just two blokes having a coffee’ this morning are bizarre

He added:

We know the meeting lasted just *16* minutes. That is barely enough time for a proper cup of coffee

All of this points in one direction. It certainly doesn’t point to a convivial cup of coffee

Advertisement

We’ll see how things pan out – Team Streeting is going to ground today – but the whole thing is a tinderbox

Streeting is supposedly not going to mount a challenge to Starmer today because the King’s Speech is happening, as Dan Hodges reported:

Where we are:

* Wes Streeting will make no move today because of King’s Speech

Advertisement

* I’m told at least 3 cabinet ministers attempted to speak to Keir Starmer after cabinet, but were rebuffed

* MPs amazed at the bullish messages coming from No.10. “They’re goading the PLP” one says

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) May 13, 2026

The questions is whether he’ll ever launch a challenge, with his support allegedly having evaporated:

BREAKING: An ally of Wes Streeting – who came out publicly to call for Starmer to go – says Streeting has “blown it.” They say he has lost support today from MPs who might have backed him and that they now don’t think he has the numbers to get on the ballot. https://t.co/PSx2ent1AQ

— Alex Wickham (@alexwickham) May 12, 2026

Given that Streeting is a much-hated privatisation fetishist with ties to Peter Mandelson, it’s unclear why he thinks anyone should see him as an alternative to Starmer.

Dwindling support

Starmer does have some supporters left. As Skwawkbox reported on 12 May, however, he has fewer than he claims. Specifically, three of the MPs who supposedly signed a letter of support for the PM claim not to have signed it:

Surprised to see my name on this list when I haven’t either signed any letter supporting the PM or called for the PM to go??

Not very courteous of colleagues to put names down without their approval https://t.co/2TofoVdfKb

Advertisement

— Rupa Huq MP (@RupaHuq) May 12, 2026

In terms of those opposing the PM, James Wright wrote on 12 May:

The Tribune Group of more than 100 Labour MPs have called for the prime minister to steer the party back to the left. Meanwhile, 81 MPs have demanded he stand down after Labour came third in the local elections when it comes to national vote share.

The number of MPs calling for Starmer to go has grown since then too:

"Something has got to give."

With over 90 MPs calling for Keir Starmer to resign, the prime minister is "still dug in", says Times Radio presenter John Pienaar. pic.twitter.com/oEdWYOqOXz

— Times Radio (@TimesRadio) May 12, 2026

What happens next?

Starmer is stubbornly ignoring the fact that he’s lost the faith of the British public and his own party. Quite how long he can get away with this for we don’t know, but it’s longer than 16 minutes.

Featured image via The Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

King Charles has laid out the government’s plans for the next parliamentary session in a significant moment within the Westminster’s calendar.

The occasion is laden with pomp and pageantry but it has political weight, too, especially as Keir Starmer’s government is facing a moment of jeopardy.

Here’s what you need to know.

What Is The King’s Speech?

Advertisement

The King’s Speech marks the State Opening of the second session of parliament after Labour’s victory in 2024.

Parliamentary sessions divide up each parliament and the government tends to announce a new one roughly every two years.

It’s a formal occasion which gives the government a chance to reset its priorities.

As the head of state, the monarch reads out the government’s agenda in the House of Lords.

Advertisement

He has no say in its contents but his role is symbolic of the sovereign’s position in the constitution.

No substantive parliamentary business can take place in the House of Commons or Lords until after the speech.

MPs will then start a debate the speech’s contents following comments from the leader of the opposition, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch.

The Lords also hold a general, short conversation about the contents of the King’s Speech though they usually do not vote on the contents.

Advertisement

The debate tends to last over several sitting days and each day focuses on a theme before the MPs vote on its contents.

It is possible for the speech to be amended, though that is quite unusual.

It would be deeply embarrassing if MPs were to vote it down, implying the Commons no longer has confidence in the government,

The last time that happened was in 1924, when Stanley Baldwin’s minority government was defeated and he had to resign as prime minister.

Advertisement

What Was In The Speech?

The King said the government would tackle antisemitism, raise living standards and improve trade relations in the next parliamentary session.

Improving trade relations is “vital”, the King said, and ministers will introduce legislation to take advantage of new opportunities – including a bill to strengthen ties with the EU.

The government will also protect “the energy, defence and economic security” of the UK for “the long-term” amid the ongoing conflict in Middle East and Ukraine war.

Advertisement

Bills to back British businesses – including help to tackle late payments and reduce the “burden of unnecessary regulation” – are also scheduled for this parliamentary session.

Ministers will “defend the British values of decency, tolerance and respect for difference under our common flag”, too.

The government will encourage airport expansion, hasten road building, and deliver a “fair deal” for the north of England through the Northern Powerhouse Rail, while also safeguarding domestic production of steel.

The government vowed to continue investing in apprenticeships as well and will push ahead with its controversial plans to launch digital ID plans.

Advertisement

After the scandal around ex-Labour peer Peter Mandelson and his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, the government plans to bring forward a “duty of candour” for public servants – and make it possible to strip Lords of their peerages.

Remediation for people living with unsafe cladding will also be sped up.

On the international stage, foreign policy will be based on “calm assessment of national interest” and offering “unflinching support for Ukraine”.

The government also promised to uphold its “unbreakable commitment” to Nato.

Advertisement

Ministers will invest in social housing and reform leaseholds, along with laws to tackle state threats, extreme violence and cyber attacks.

Charles said clean energy will be scaled up amid a “new era of British nuclear energy generation” in a bid to shore up UK’s energy security.

The King said the UK will be a “leading advocate” on social justice issues, too, including climate change and the rights of women and girls.

Why Is This A Particularly Tense Moment For The Government?

Starmer’s premiership is hanging by a thread following Labour’s catastrophic losses in last week’s elections in England, Wales and Scotland.

Advertisement

Buckingham Palace allegedly double-checked with Downing Street officials that the speech is still going ahead this week as the government looked like it was about to fall on Tuesday.

More than 80 Labour MPs called for the PM to resign amid mounting fury over the government’s direction.

Four ministers and four ministerial aides have also quit and urged Starmer to set out a timetable for his departure from No.10.

But the prime minister is holding firm, insisting he will not walk away from government.

Advertisement

None of his cabinet ministers have yet resigned meaning the government can limp on, despite the mass discontent.

All eyes are on health secretary Wes Streeting, who has aspirations to be the next PM but is yet to directly challenge the PM.

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

This week, former Reform UK deputy leader, Ben Habib, accused Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson of colluding to rig the 2019 election.

Big allegations here https://t.co/0GXwyEIg9y

— Harry Eccles (@Heccles94) May 12, 2026

As we’ll get into, the accusation he made isn’t quite the one which is being shared above. Habib still made a very serious allegation, however, so it’s unsurprising that Nigel Farage has now responded.

Farage election scandal: Who and what is involved?

We assume that readers are familiar with Nigel Farage and former prime minister, Boris Johnson. You may be less familiar with the donor Christopher Harborne and the accuser, Ben Habib.

Harborne recently attracted attention because we learned he gave Farage a £5 million ‘gift’ before the 2024 general election. This proved controversial because Farage didn’t declare the gift.

He’s very rattled about this and rightly so. It’s a scandal. https://t.co/5kd4PXuz7G

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) May 9, 2026

This is what the Canary reported on 6 March:

Back in May, Farage told the Las Vegas Bitcoin Conference that his party would launch a “crypto revolution”. On the same day, Reform announced that it would start accepting donations in crypto.

Then, in the very next financial quarter, Harborne’s major £9 million donation to Reform rolled in on 1 August. It was the largest ever gift from a private individual to a political party.

Advertisement

At the time, the Canary highlighted that Harborne also donated millions to the Brexit Party in 2019, as well as to the Conservatives between 2001 and 2022. While Harborne is British, he’s now based in Thailand.

Meanwhile, Habib left Reform UK to establish Advance UK. He’s stated that his problem with Reform was Farage and how he runs the party.

Advance UK is a democratic movement. Members endorse our mission, not the other way around. No censorship. No cronyism. Just serious, open politics. pic.twitter.com/lItBkNsKBz

— Ben Habib (@BackBrexitBen) August 9, 2025

Advertisement

Habib: ‘This is the first time I’ve said this’

In the video at the top, Habib says:

I have never said this publicly before, but now that we’ve discovered this is the first time I’ve said this, Paul, but now that we’ve discovered five million quid went to Farage in 2024, I am obliged to disclose the million quid which I believe went to Farage in late 2022 as well. And that smacks to me of a deal.

The 2019 general election was sewn up between Nigel Farage, Christopher Harborne and Boris Johnson. And it was a monetary deal. That’s how I see it.

Habib also said:

Now, Harborne had always told me that he wanted Brexit, he believed in Brexit, and it was an admirable thing that the Brexit Party was doing to fight for Brexit, and that’s why he donated, I think he donated £14 million in total to the Brexit Party. Without Christopher Harborne, there was no Brexit Party.

But you’ll also remember, and viewers will remember, that suddenly, in the general election of 2019, Farage stood down 317 Brexit Party candidates against the Tory party across the country. Every single Tory MP had no Brexit Party opposition. He killed the Brexit Party’s prospects in that general election and he ensured a Boris Johnson government in one move like that.

And the argument that Farage made in 2019 was, if I don’t do that, we might get Corbyn, there’ll be a second referendum, and we might lose Brexit. And I bought that argument. But that argument failed to hold water when Farage refused to bring pressure on Boris Johnson to get a proper Brexit.

He just left the battlefield at that point. We all knew the withdrawal agreement was crap. We all knew that Boris Johnson was hopeless at the whole thing. And Farage swanned off.

The financial details

People have suggested Habib claimed Harborne paid Farage and Johnson £1 million apiece to rig the election. This presumably must mean the 2019 election as it was the only election in which Farage and Johnson opposed one another as leaders of political parties. This is somewhat at odds with the allegations Habib made in the clip, which is that Harborne:

• Paid Farage £1m in 2022
• Paid Johnson in £1m in 2023
• Had a “monetary deal” in 2019 to ‘sew up’ the election

In other words, be careful when repeating Habib’s allegations to avoid inviting legal action yourself. Either way, Habib has indeed suggested money changed hands to influence the outcome of the 2019 election. He just hasn’t attached a figure to it.

Regardless of the specifics, Farage had responded:

My lawyers have formally written to Ben Habib.

They demanded an immediate apology and public retraction for the baseless allegations he made today.

I do not take legal action often. But I will not accept slander & politically motivated smears after winning a national election.

In the video at the top, Habib was confident Farage wouldn’t take legal action.

He said:

Now, I have said a number of things just now to you, Paul, which would end with me being, which should end with me being on the end of legal action from Christopher Harborne and Nigel Farage, if what I’ve said is wrong. They will not sue me because what I’m telling you is the truth.

We’re now waiting to see if Farage follows through or it all gets quietly dropped.

Big money

Even if Habib’s 2019 election claims don’t bear out, we know a foreign-based crypto-billionaire has donated millions to Farage and his political parties. People are free to believe that he’s doing so out of the goodness of his heart, but we’re not convinced anyone with that much money has that much heart.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

This wasn’t just an election. It was a verdict.

The dust has perfectly settled on last week’s local elections, and what a glorious, blood-soaked carnival of neoliberal failure it was.

Labour eviscerated

The Labour Party, under the watchful, slightly constipated gaze of Keir Starmer, has been eviscerated.

More than 1,400 councillors are gone and control of dozens of councils evaporated like the morning mist over a fracked countryside.

In the north, heartlands that once beat with the red pulse of organised labour turned to Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in numbers that should terrify every suit in Westminster.

The Greens picked up hundreds of seats too, because when your government offers nothing but warm words and cold cuts to the working class, people will grasp at any alternative.

I won’t pretend the Greens are the pure saviours of the left, though their gains are a bright spot. But at least they are offering something closer to genuine alternatives in places like Lewisham and Hackney.

All branding, no kick

So, let’s start with the man at the top. Keir Starmer, the once-great socialist hope who turned out to be the political equivalent of decaffeinated coffee – all of the branding but none of the kick.

The red wall was supposed to be rebuilt, brick by brick, with hope and public investment. Instead, we’ve had two years of Starmerism, which is no more than a beige ideology that blends Tory austerity with a smug human rights lawyer’s lecture on fiscal responsibility.

Labour were hammered because NHS waiting lists are still a national disgrace. The housing crisis is worsening and wages stagnate while fat cat energy bosses laugh all the way to their offshore accounts.

And don’t get me started on the deeply flawed migration policy that somehow manages to be both inhumane enough to alienate the left and ineffective enough to hand Reform UK a stick to poke them with.

And what of Keir Starmer’s response to the epic battering?

He “took responsibility” in that trademarked way of his – the one where he sounds like a headmaster explaining why the school trip was cancelled due to fiscal restraints.

More managerial piffle

There has been no resignation. No leadership contest, yet. Just more of the same managerial piffle about delivering change, as if the electorate didn’t notice that his idea of change is rebranding the same old capitulation to markets, donors, and focus groups.

The man ran on a platform of not being the Tories, and then governed like their ever-so-slightly more competent cousin who still sends Christmas cards to the CBI.

Here was a party that purged its left-wing with the ruthless efficiency of a Stalinist show trial, only to discover that, without actual socialism, they had nothing to offer the people who clean their offices, drive their Ubers, and staff their hospitals.

The purge of the Corbynites was supposed to make Labour electable. Turns out it made them forgettable. Working-class voters didn’t abandon Labour because it was too left-wing; they abandoned Labour because it abandoned them.

Peacocking Farage

Meanwhile, in comes Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, strutting like a peacock that’s just discovered TikTok.

Farage’s merry band of racist populists gained over 1,400 seats themselves, snatching councils from Labour in places like Barnsley, Bradford, and Sunderland.

Be in no doubt, Reform is not the answer. They’re the question, asked in the most obnoxious accent possible. Their politics is a toxic cocktail of anti-immigrant scapegoating, culture-war drivel, and promises to cut taxes for the rich while magically fixing public services.

Farage offers the political version of those miracle weight-loss pills. Swallow this, blame the foreigners and the tofu-eating wokesters, and everything will be fine.

It won’t work. It never does.

Rage channelled into nativism

Not all Reform voters in these elections were secret fascists cackling over a pint. Many were angry, decent people watching their communities crumble under decades of neglect – first New Labour’s warmongering and PFI scams, then Tory austerity, then Starmer’s continuation of the same failed ideological vandalism.

Reform channels that rage into nativism because it’s easier than admitting the real enemy is a capitalist system. Isn’t it funny how they continuously rail against “elites” while their financial backers include the same hedge-fund types and offshore interests who’ve been hoovering up wealth for generations? Perhaps you’re not supposed to notice?

To Reform voters, just in case you stumble upon this. Your anger is entirely valid, but your diagnosis is absolutely wrong. Blaming the brown person down the road won’t nationalise the railways, build council houses or bring down energy bills.

The new Reform councillors will now have to do the unglamorous work of fixing potholes and arguing over bin collections – tasks that don’t lend themselves to viral rants about “the blob”.

Seriously, I cannot wait for the first Reform-run council to discover that stopping the boats doesn’t magically repair the roof of the local leisure centre.

A brutal mirror

The local election results are a brutal mirror. Starmer’s Labour looked into it and saw a party that had become indistinguishable from the establishment it once opposed.

Reform looked and saw an opportunity to surf the wave of discontent without offering structural change.

Both are symptoms of the same disease – a broken economic system that concentrates power and wealth while preaching meritocracy and resilience to those left behind.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachael Swindon

Source link

Source link