Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

Newslinks for Sunday 8th February 2026

Published

on

Newslinks for Friday 30th January 2026

Mandelson 1) Lammy claims he warned against appointment

“David Lammy turned on the Prime Minister as allies revealed he had warned against appointing Lord Mandelson as the ambassador to the US. In a blow to Sir Keir Starmer, friends of the Deputy Prime Minister confirmed on Saturday night that he had not been in favour of bringing the “Prince of Darkness” back into government over his links to Jeffrey Epstein. Mr Lammy is the first Cabinet minister to break openly with the embattled Prime Minister, whose future hangs in the balance over the Mandelson scandal.” – Sunday Telegraph

  • ‘Starmer’s position untenable’, says Richard Burgon MP – BBC
  • Police finish search of Peter Mandelson’s addresses – Sunday Times
  • Three things that could bring Starmer down and what might save him – BBC
  • Prime Minister “agonising over his future, see-sawing between anger and self-reproach” – Sunday Telegraph
  • Starmer’s losing sleep – Caroline Wheeler, Sunday Times

Comment

  • From the Russians to the Americans, and from our own spies to the Civil Service, everyone knew the truth about Mandelson – everyone, that is, except Keir Starmer – Dan Hodges, Mail on Sunday
  • Shorn of its moral purity, what is Starmer’s Labour now for? – Leader, Sunday Times
  • Starmer must go. But there may be worse to come – Leader, Sunday Telegraph
  • How Mandelson and a bunch of revolutionaries created the sordid world in which we live – Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday
  • For once, Keir Starmer thought outside the box. It may finish him – Matthew Syed, Sunday Times
  • Starmer’s gullibility over Mandelson vetting scandal gets worse by the day – Leader, The Sun on Sunday
  • I saw first-hand how Epstein and Ghislaine got their claws into the world’s most powerful men – Barbara Amiel, Mail on Sunday
  • Starmer has only his own judgment to blame – Jason Cowley, Sunday Times
  • Controlling the story is what Mandelson is about – and now he has lost it – Janet Daley, Sunday Telegraph
  • The Peter Mandelson scandal has turned ‘No drama Starmer’ into a lurid soap opera – Andrew Rawnsley, Observer
  • A soft-left coup won’t save Labour. It’s not what people voted for – Josh Glancy, Sunday Times
  • I have known Peter Mandelson for 40 years, He has always had two sides and one of them is dark like Voldemort – David Blunkett, The Sun on Sunday
  • One thing we know: Epstein was no Mossad agent – Jake Wallis Simons, Sunday Telegraph

Mandelson 2) Payoff worth tens of thousands for being sacked as ambassador

“Lord Mandelson received a taxpayer-funded payoff worth tens of thousands of pounds despite being sacked as ambassador to the US over his links to the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson, 72, secured an exit payment equivalent to three months’ salary from the Foreign Office after he was forced out in September last year, just seven months into the role. His salary has not yet been published by the government but the post of ambassador to the US typically commands the highest in the diplomatic service — pay band SCS4, between £155,000 and £220,000 per annum. It would imply that Mandelson received an exit payment of between £38,750 and £55,000 before tax and other deductions.” – Sunday Times

  • Foreign Office to “review” payment – BBC

Mandelson 3) Brown defends Starmer as “man of integrity”

“Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown has told the BBC the situation facing Sir Keir Starmer was “serious” and suggested he may have been “too slow to do the right things” concerning Lord Mandelson. The prime minister is under mounting pressure from Labour MPs over his decision to appoint Lord Mandelson as the UK’s US ambassador in 2024 – despite Mandelson’s relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein being a matter of public record at the time. Brown said the appointment had been a “mistake”, saying he had also made a mistake by bringing Lord Mandelson into his own cabinet in 2008. But he told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme he backed Sir Keir as a “man of integrity” who had been “betrayed” by Lord Mandelson, adding the prime minister was the right man to “clean up the system.” – BBC

  • Ditch Starmer for a caretaker leader, Labour MPs say… as insiders claim PM’s closest aide McSweeney is on brink of quitting – Mail on Sunday
  • “Starmer has to stay. You wouldn’t sack a football manager after 35 minutes” – Sadiq Khan interview, Observer

Mandelson 4) Ed Miliband “plots return”

“Ed Miliband has told pals he wants to run again to be Prime Minister – and will model his leadership on New York’s new leftwing Mayor. The Net Zero minister will stand if Sir Keir Starmer is ousted from No10 over the Peter Mandelson scandal, insiders said. Mr Miliband thinks Angela Rayner will not be able to stand while the probe into her tax affairs still looms over her – clearing the way for him to be the leftwing candidate. He wants to run as leader who can “bring down the cost of living” – despite the failure of his pledge to cut energy bills by £300.” – The Sun on Sunday

Lord Alli is named in the Epstein Files

“Emails show Lord Alli appeared on a list of guests due to attend a dinner hosted by Epstein at New York’s Monkey Bar restaurant in February 2010. Both men were also listed as guests at a large society dinner in August 2010 – although it’s not known whether Lord Alli attended either dinner. Lord Alli’s name also appears alongside that of Peter Mandelson in an email Epstein wrote to himself entitled ‘contacts’. In another email from May 2012, Epstein mentions to a friend that Mandelson and Lord Alli were staying at Shelter Island in the Hamptons, the exclusive summer playground for America’s elite.” – Mail on Sunday

Reeves under pressure not to give Spring Statement

“Rachel Reeves is under pressure to duck out of delivering the Spring Statement to avoid unsettling the financial markets, The Telegraph understands. Officials in her own department have discussed the possibility of lining up a junior minister to stand in for the Chancellor, according to discussions which are under way in the Treasury. Mandarins are keen to stress that the statement, set to take place on March 3, will be a “non-event”. Some in Whitehall believe excluding the Chancellor from making the statement would emphasise its “low-key” nature, but such a move would probably raise questions about Ms Reeves’s future amid speculation of a Cabinet reshuffle.” –  Sunday Telegraph

“Where are the wets? ” asks Badenoch

“Badenoch is adamant that those who remain on her benches are bona fide Right-wingers. “Where are these ‘wets’?” she asks, rhetorically. I quietly mention Ruth Davidson and Andy Street, two respected Tory figures who just launched Prosper, a new movement to attract moderate voters, of which there are apparently seven million. “I don’t think they’ve fully thought it through,” she replies. As for a Reform pact, it remains out of the question – not so much because Farage maintains his ambition to destroy the Conservatives, but because Badenoch believes it’ll embolden the Left to form some alliance of their own.” – Interview with Kemi Badenoch, Sunday Telegraph

Advertisement

Academics challenge Phillipson over threat to free speech

“Bridget Phillipson has been accused by more than 300 academics of undermining free speech after mothballing plans to tackle “cancel culture” on university campuses. The education secretary pledged at the start of last year to establish a legally enshrined complaints system to protect academics from attempts to censor or cancel them by students or university authorities. However, the Department for Education has failed to set out any timetable to bring in the protections, with sources suggesting it is unlikely to be included in next year’s parliamentary session. In a letter to Phillipson, 370 academics including three Nobel laureates and senior figures of civil society accused the education secretary of kicking the scheme “into the long grass” with “real consequences for academics at the sharp end”. ” – Sunday Times

EU demands Britain accepts “onerous terms” to join £130billion defence fund

“British firms will be forced to source key technology and parts from Europe if Sir Keir Starmer signs up to a £130 billion EU defence fund, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. The clause – slipped into the small print at a backroom meeting in Brussels last week – was immediately condemned as the latest trick to impose EU rules on a post-Brexit Britain. And one defence expert said the conditions would be ‘utterly deadly for our national security’ – amid fears it would block the UK from accessing cutting-edge American defence technology. Eurocrats have also slapped a £2 billion fee on the UK joining the Security Action For Europe scheme, or Safe – a figure the Government has so far baulked at. The fund provides low-interest loans to companies in Europe needing ‘urgent and large-scale’ boosts to military capability such as ammunition, drones and missiles.” – Mail on Sunday

Knives out for Green by-election candidate … from her own side

“Green Party campaigners have serious concerns about their candidate, strategy and “propaganda” leaflets in the Gorton and Denton by-election, leaked WhatsApp messages have revealed. Messages between members of the party’s team last week show staff are worried about “dodgy” data in campaign leaflets, as well as about their candidate, Hannah Spencer. The activists also questioned the Green strategy of claiming it was the only party that could beat Reform UK, while offering “no actual policies” to voters.” – Sunday Telegraph

Other political news

  • Home Office ‘tried to silence adviser who raised concerns about Islamism’ – Sunday Telegraph
  • Blair “bereft” at death of former constituency agent John Burton – BBC
  • Ex-education secretary urges cut in ‘horrendous’ student loan interest – Sunday Times
  • Japanese brave snow to vote in snap election – BBC
  • How Substack makes money from hosting Nazi newsletters – The Guardian
  • Australia’s opposition coalition reunites after row over hate-speech laws – BBC
  • Former Scottish health secretary Jeane Freeman dies aged 72 after cancer battle – The Sun on Sunday
  • Water bosses in England exploiting bonus loophole face crackdown – The Guardian
  • Lib Dem peer suspended again over harassment allegations – BBC
  • ‘Wholesale’ reform of Lords planned after blocking of assisted dying bill – Observer
  • Nation faces ‘electrical deserts’ as electricians age and too few are trained – Sunday Express

Ashcroft: Is the ‘insecure, manipulative diva’ Angela Rayner really Prime Minister material?

“Polling I have done suggests she’s a more divisive figure than Starmer. Last December people were more than twice as likely to say she would make a worse PM than Sir Keir as to say she would be better. But while Conservative and Reform UK voters were of that view, Labour supporters were more likely than not to think she would be an improvement. In my focus groups, voters often say they find her background and her blunt approach a refreshing change. But not everyone is convinced. While she seems unlikely to win new converts to Labour’s cause, a Rayner premiership could galvanise voters on both sides. I don’t know whether Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage would rather face Starmer or Rayner in the Commons chamber, but I do know that successful prime ministers have a certain je ne sais quoi, absent in Rayner. And for all her strengths, I can’t help wondering whether her lack of experience and impetuous nature would do more harm than good.” – Lord Ashcroft, Mail on Sunday

Lawson: Reform UK is a big state party

“It’s no accident that such a high proportion of the senior Conservatives who have defected to Reform are former acolytes of Boris Johnson (for example Nadhim Zahawi, Jake Berry and Nadine Dorries). Johnson was a big-state Conservative, whose attitude to the public debt was blithely insouciant. It was Danny Kruger, a more austere figure, who, speaking from the Conservative benches in July, said: “I do quite like the Reform party and I agree with its members on lots of things, but there is a problem: they would spend money like drunken sailors.” Two months later Kruger defected to the drunken sailor party.” – Dominic Lawson, Sunday Times

Advertisement
  • This might have been the week when Farage won the next election – James Frayne, Sunday Telegraph

News in brief

  • What does ‘social value’ have to do with rebuilding Parliament? – Maxwell Marlow, CapX
  • The Mandelson scandal is far grubbier than the Profumo affair – Julie Burchill, The Spectator
  • What constitutional powers are available to a Prime Minister on the verge of losing office? – Jacob Rees-Mogg, Substack
  • Starmer, man of sleaze – Tom Jones, The Critic
  • It’s time to defund the British Council – Charlotte Gill, Daily Sceptic

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

The world cannot afford the continued existence of so-called ‘Israel’

Published

on

Israel receive oil after Trump's dirty war in Venezuela

The editor-in-chief of neoliberal propaganda factory the Economist, Zanny Minton Beddoes, spectacularly fumbled her attempts to push out Zionist talking points during an interview with right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson.

Minton Beddoes attempted to ask the former Fox News host whether he believed in so-called ‘Israel’s’ right to exist. In doing so she functioned as the troll guarding the bridge that provides a route to acceptance within the British and US ruling class. The question serves the same role as a previous favourite — “Do you condemn Hamas?” — a litmus test to establish whether the person being interrogated is ‘one of us’.

When pushed by Carlson to define the question, Minton Beddoes immediately seemed taken aback and began to stutter and flail as she attempted to work out what her own enquiry meant. Understandably so, given that like all good propaganda phrases, it doesn’t mean anything. There is no concept in law of a state’s right to exist.

As pointed out by former UN official, Moncef Khane:

Advertisement

Statehood is a political reality not a legal one.

Israel and its ‘right to exist’

Prompting people on the Zionist entity’s right to exist is a bit like questions demanding whether people “support the troops”, used during the illegal 2003 US-led assault on Iraq. Well, what exactly is being asked? If it’s just “Do you wish this particular group of random people no harm?” then the answer may well be “Yes, of course” — but that would be meaningless. Why ask about this group of people rather than any other?

Clearly the aim is to insist on specific allegiance to a politically relevant group of people in this case US soldiers for the sake of pursuing a geopolitical goal. To entrap people into backing a war by proxy via ostensibly apolitical support for the lives of those fighting it.

The question on the Zionist settler-colony is a similar ruse an attempt to align the answerer with the Zionist cause out of fear that replying in the negative would imply a violent desire to annihilate a ‘state’ and its people. However, one can reject the legitimacy of ‘Israel’s’ creation, and its continued existence, without the desire for any use of force.

Advertisement

Its birth was the result of land theft, mass murder and ethnic cleansing, followed by apartheid and genocide. Were there such a concept as a state’s right to exist, this criminal ethnostate would be the last one entitled to it.

It’s normal for states to peacefully disappear

Its end need not be one of violence, but ideally of peaceful dissolution into one democratic state for all those in historic Palestine. It is normal in other contexts to wish for a state to cease its existence without fear of being labelled a budding genocidaire.

When republicans and nationalists in Ireland say they want their country to be reunited, this necessarily involves the disappearance of so-called ‘Northern Ireland’. Only the most extreme loyalists would suggest this is a call for mass murder or ethnic cleansing.

When Koreans speak of uniting their country, everyone understands that the subsequent non-existence of North Korea and South Korea isn’t genocidal in nature.

Advertisement

In this regard, once again the Zionist entity is subject to special privileges, whereby questioning its fictional right to exist is seen as a call to arms, or antisemitism. In reality, the most pressing question now is not nonsense centred on whether ‘Israel’ has the right to exist. Instead it is can the world afford its continued presence?

The arrival of Zionists in Palestine has always been an existential threat to Palestinians. Since the entry of mostly European colonists, they have been subjected to brutal ethnic cleansing and, latterly, a holocaust. That alone should have made ‘Israel’s’ existence intolerable long ago. However, as Zionist violence now engulfs all of West Asia, the scale of its bloodlust now imperils the entire planet.

Zionism endangers the world

The criminals in Tel Aviv aim to rip Iran apart, causing the fragmentation of a nation of 92 million people. The destabilisation likely wouldn’t stop there, and neighbouring countries with ethnic and religious tensions would likely be similarly affected.

Europe is so racist that even minor flows of refugees have seen far-right and overtly fascist parties flourish as they blame immigrants for all social ills. That would only deepen in the event that a far bigger crisis were to emerge and vast numbers of desperate people from west Asia sought sanctuary in Europe.

Advertisement

The world sadly still relies on climate wrecking fossil fuels. While that is the case, destruction of the facilities that produce them is liable to cause massive economic crises globally. The Zionist entity insisted on bombing the world’s largest natural gas condensate field at South Pars. That prompted Iran to respond in kind, attacking oil production in Gulf nations backing the settler-colony.

Fuel price inflation pushes up the price of everything else. When people on average incomes struggle, there is again the potential they look to far-right demagogues for salvation.

Many democracies have already been degraded through Zionist influence, with basic rights suspended in the name of backing the atrocities of the land theft project. That process is only likely to continue in the event of further financial chaos if reactionaries take the levers of power.

Respected commentators, such as economist Jeffrey Sachs, have warned the current conflagration started by so-called ‘Israel’ may ultimately trigger terminal warfare. Sachs said:

Advertisement

We are probably in the early days of World War III.

The Samson option

It may not even take that for the Zionist entity to bring about worldwide devastation. Numerous Zionists have fantasised about, or actively threatened, use of the ‘Samson option’. That is, the criminal pseudo-state using its vast nuclear arsenal to attack nations across the world in the event of its own impending demise, similar to the biblical figure of Samson bringing down the temple upon himself and his enemies.

Zionist university professor, David Perlmutter, imagined a glorious nuclear wasteland triggered by ‘Israel’. In an 2022 LA Times column, he wrote:

What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens?

For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away — unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans — have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?

‘Israeli’ military historian, Martin van Creveld, threatened, in response to a scenario in which the world attempted to prevent forced transfer of Palestinians:

Advertisement

But would the world permit such ethnic cleansing? That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.

Tucker Carlson was ultimately too cowardly or indoctrinated to challenge all premises of the Economist editor’s ridiculous question. While he pushed back on the meaning of ‘right to exist’, he interpreted an answer of ‘no’ to mean a call for the settler-colony’s destruction. He said he didn’t want that, as he had no desire for people to die. Not much more can be expected of a former Fox News host, even one with anti-Zionist tendencies.

Ultimately it will be for people of conscience and integrity on the left to decisively shift the Overton window on so-called ‘Israel’, to the point where its peaceful dissolution, achieved by constant external pressure, becomes the accepted mainstream wisdom.

‘Israel’ has no right to exist, but the people of the world do. Their fate may depend on ending the settler-colony’s continued malign presence at the earliest opportunity.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump makes fuzzy claims about Iran “peace talks”

Published

on

Trump makes fuzzy claims about Iran “peace talks”

US president Donald Trump has been waffling about peace talks amid his stalling war on Iran. Meanwhile, Iranian officials have flatly denied that any discussions have taken place. One official even said that Iran was busy carrying out “complete and remorseful punishment” of its enemies.

The US and Israel attacked Iran on 28 February in an unprovoked, unlawful strike. Omani officials revealed at the time that Iran had been offering unprecedented concessions during negotiations. The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

In one interview posted on 23 March, Trump claimed that talks were already taking place:

When challenged on this claim, Trump said Iran needed better PR:

Well, they’re gonna have to get themselves better public relations people. We’ve had very strong talks. Mr Witkoff and Kushner had them. They went perfectly.

It was even claimed the US Republican leader had postponed further strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure due to these alleged talks.

Advertisement

There was some evidence that energy markets had bounced back as a result of Trump’s comments:

Al Jazeera reported:

Advertisement

The US president adds that the two ⁠sides have had “major points of agreement” during the talks he claims US officials have held with Iran.

Trump’s full interview on the supposed talks can be accessed here.

Iran denies talks

Yet Iran has completely rejected and contradicted Trump’s claims. Axios cited a source which said no negotiations had occurred:

And Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf appears to be in no mood to negotiate:

No negotiations have been held with the US, and fake news is used to manipulate the financial and oil markets and escape the quagmire in which the US and Israel are trapped.

One unnamed Iranian source told Al Jazeera that:

Trump “backed down” after being warned that Iran would target power plants across the Gulf and in Israel.

The report added that Trump had said talks with Iran were underway despite the source denying any such communication.

The outlet added that:

Advertisement

The claims could not be independently verified, and there has been no immediate comment from Iranian officials.

Trump threatened to hit Iranian energy infrastructure on 22 March:

If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST.

As is often the case, Trump’s abrupt shift from belligerence to unverified claims of progress in talks is difficult to decode. What is clear, however, is that the US war effort is stalling. The war is deeply unpopular domestically, and has, in effect, transformed Iran into an oil superpower—tightening its grip over one of the world’s most critical oil choke points.

Worse yet, America’s flagship aircraft carrier, the USS Ford, has limped to Crete for repairs after a serious fire. Meanwhile, US rivals like China are watching to see how they can turn this latest US blunder to their advantage.

Trump is known for believing he can shape reality through bullying, dealmaking, and cajoling. For now, that belief appears to have hit an Iran-shaped brick wall.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump's Iran Rambles

Published

on

Trump's Iran Rambles

!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”:”11734195-b25f-4a13-a9a8-b8f5e0694fcd”}).render(“69c19f60e4b0964b57004cc2”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Billionaire Marc Andreessen rejects deep thinking

Published

on

Billionaire Marc Andreessen rejects deep thinking

Billionaire Marc Andreessen has claimed that “introspection” is of little value and only goes back 400 years. He also said he engages in “zero” or “as little as possible” deep thinking, noting that:

I find that people who dwell on the past, get stuck the past.

Ever heard of philosophy?

Andreessen, a Silicon Valley Venture Capitalist, made the comments on the Founders podcast:

Andreessen claims:

Advertisement

If you go back 400 years ago, it would never have occurred to anybody to be introspective… Great men of history didn’t sit around doing this stuff at any prior point right?

He must be trolling, right? Even before Ancient Greece, highly influential philosophy in Persia (modern-day Iran) dates back to 1700–1800 BCE. Zarathustra, as well as Hammurabi’s Code (c. 1754 BCE), introduced revolutionary ethical concepts that later Western philosophers like Immanuel Kant built upon through Deontology (acting as if everyone followed your example). Then there’s the opposing theory: Utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number).

No wonder Andreessen has ‘zero’ introspection. He clearly thinks little of established ethical frameworks. The billionaire probably finds it convenient not to reflect on his actions, as he now simply takes stakes in businesses and lets the money roll in. Meanwhile, 90 percent of Americans own just around 10 percent of the stocks.

Philosophy was the original subject, before Plato taught Aristotle in around 400-300 BCE. Aristotle then categorised study into different subjects. This was the literal foundation of Western academic thought and educational systems.

Introspection: high value

Introspection is highly important, but it must be coupled with study. Otherwise you are just going over ideas that prior thinkers have dedicated their lives to.

Advertisement

It’s obvious why billionaires want to promote mindless consumerism. The thing is, will people continue to dumb themselves down?

Featured image via X/Twitter

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

WATCH: Starmer Loses Cool in Liaison Committee Over Missing Defence Plan

Published

on

WATCH: Starmer Loses Cool in Liaison Committee Over Missing Defence Plan

Rattled…

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

The House | The Committee on Standards is a unique House of Commons select committee

Published

on

The Committee on Standards is a unique House of Commons select committee
The Committee on Standards is a unique House of Commons select committee


4 min read

The Committee on Standards plays a unique role within the House of Commons. It is unusual compared to other select committees as it fulfils several functions.

Advertisement

Firstly, the committee (alike other committees) undertakes a policy function. It is responsible for recommending any modifications to the Code of Conduct as may from time to time appear to be necessary.

The committee also undertakes a key role in enforcing the code, considering and reporting on the commissioner’s memoranda on individual cases (the process is described in more detail below.)

The committee is also unique as it includes lay members. Lay members have full voting rights on the committee. The inclusion of lay members means it is not just MPs involved in the decision-making process. As there are equal numbers of lay members and MPs on the committee, and the chair (an MP) does not vote, lay members effectively hold the majority.

In addition, the lay members have the power to append an opinion to any committee report. The lay members are always asked whether they wish to submit an opinion before a report is finalised.

Policy functions:

Over this year, the committee will revisit the Code of Conduct to ensure that it remains up to date and fit for purpose in the current day.  The committee will be sure to speak to colleagues across the House for their input on this important matter.

Advertisement

The committee also has the power to update the guide to the rules for All-Party Parliamentary Groups. In the coming year, the committee is likely to review the operation of All-Party Parliamentary Groups. This work would build upon the committee’s previous work from 2023.

Considering individual cases:

The Committee on Standards oversees the work of the independent parliamentary commissioner. The commissioner is an independent officer of the House of Commons.

The commissioner is responsible for the monitoring and operation of the House of Commons Code of Conduct and registers (including investigating alleged breaches). Under the Standing Orders of the House, the rectification procedure means the commissioner may conclude an investigation without making a referral to the committee.

Advertisement

The committee is not involved with the commissioner’s investigations, nor with what he puts in the accompanying memoranda.

The role of the committee is to consider alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct which have been drawn to the committee’s attention by the commissioner. The committee does not have the jurisdiction to open its own investigations.

When the committee considers a case referred to it, it must decide whether there has been a breach of the code. Should the committee decide that there has been a breach, it has a range of sanctions available to it; the most serious ones, such as suspension, must be agreed by the House itself.

The committee has recently dealt with three cases which resulted in minor breaches. They were in relation to APPGs, timely declarations of interest, and lobbying the commissioner.

Advertisement

The House agreed on 18 October 2022 to introduce an appeals process in the House’s standards system. This means that Members found by the Committee on Standards to have breached the Code of Conduct have a right of appeal to the Independent Expert Panel. The process for appeals is set out in chapter 6 of the Procedural Protocol agreed by the House. An appeal can only be made on specified grounds. Under the protocol, where the committee has recommended a sanction that requires a decision of the House, the House will only consider any motion relating to the committee’s recommended sanction after any appeal process has fully concluded, or the deadline for appeals lapses, or the Member has confirmed to the panel that they do not wish to appeal.

It is also important to note that the committee does not consider cases relating to bullying, sexual misconduct or harassment. These cases are considered by the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme.

Oversight function:

The Committee on Standards also oversees the work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. This includes examining the arrangements proposed by the commissioner for the compilation maintenance and accessibility of the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and any other registers established by the House.

On the 13th of January, the committee held an evidence session with the Commissioner for Standards. The committee questioned the commissioner on a range of matters relating to his work. 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Israeli settler violence rocks the West Bank

Published

on

Israeli settler violence rocks the West Bank

On the afternoon of 21 March, 18-year-old Zionist settler, Yehuda Sherman, died when his quad-bike collided with a Palestinian owned vehicle. Sherman, who lived in the illegal outpost of Shuva Yisrael—in the northern occupied West Bank—was supposedly carrying out a “security patrol”. This is when the crash occurred.

Revenge attacks by Zionist settlers

In the immediate aftermath of his death, 20 locations across the occupied West Bank witnessed violent settler terrorist attacks.

Late on Saturday, Israeli settlers stormed the village of al-Fandaqumiya and the town of Seilat al-Dahr, south of Jenin, late on Saturday. They smashed windows and used Molotov cocktails to set fire to vehicles and homes, and they brutally attacked Palestinians.

The violence continued throughout the night into Sunday morning, in what international media sources have described as revenge attacks.

Advertisement

Settlers also hurled rocks at an ambulance belonging to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PACS) in another unprovoked attack. PACS personnel reported that the violent mob smashed the ambulance’s windscreen. This took place while they were responding to a traffic accident near the Shilo settlement in Ramallah.

In the early hours of Sunday, 22 March, a terrorist mob of Zionist settlers carried out attacks on the Palestinian towns of Jalud, and Qaryout, in Nablus. They burnt homes and vehicles, and violently assaulted Palestinians residents who reported multiple injuries.

Apartheid deepens in the occupied West Bank

Palestinian news agency WAFA reported similar incidents in Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron. Settlers, flanked by Israeli occupation forces (IOF), stormed the area. They injured two Palestinians, and three others were arrested by the IOF, while providing cover for illegal settlers.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement condemning these calculated attacks, which is described as:

Advertisement

organised settler terrorism as part of a genocidal war against the Palestinian people.

Sherman’s funeral took place on the Sunday afternoon, at Elon Moreh settlement, northeast of Nablus. More than 500 people attended, including far-right finance minister and head of the Religious Zionism party, Bezalel Smotrich. Additionally, Smotrich has been described by credible sources as a “religiously dedicated Israeli settler.”

To secure unrestricted travel routes for Israelis attendees, the IOF closed off access to Route 60the main north-south road in the West Bank. The road serves as a lifeline for rural Palestinian communities travelling to cities in the West Bank for work and school. Furthermore, the closure was announced on the last day of the Muslim Eid holiday. As a result, many Palestinians who had been visiting relatives were prevented from returning home. 

Since 7 October 2023, the Israeli occupation has installed more than 915 barriers restricting the freedom of movement for Palestinians. These include iron gates, as well as arbitrary and excessive checkpoints outside almost every village and town in the occupied West Bank. As most Palestinian communities are surrounded by iron gates, the IOF can close these at will. This further restricts the movement of West Bankers.

Settler impunity

Far-right Israeli voices have vocally condemned Sherman’s death as “murder,” without providing any supporting evidence. In a post on X, Smotrich wrote the following tribute:

Advertisement

I participate wholeheartedly in the grief of my friends and longtime partners, Yehoshua and Sima Sherman and their family, over the murder of their son, Yehuda Shmuel Sherman, may God avenge his blood, who fell while guarding our land in the settlement in the soil of Samaria [a biblical term used by Israelis to describe the northern West Bank].

Extremist, criminal national security minister Itamar Ben Gvir also posted a tribute, claiming Sherman was “murdered in the defense of the land of Samaria.”

One funeral attendee, quoted by the Times of Israel reported that Sherman had been fulfilling a “strategic mission” to expel Palestinians from the West Bank. This would bring about Jewish settlement in the territory. They said that:

Every day, he took his herd out [to pasture] to remove the enemy from all the territory there so that Jews will come back to this place.

Sherman’s father Yehoshua—aligned withSmotrich’s Religious Zionist party—pledged to continue his son’s work by establishing new illegal settlement outposts in the coming days. He also called for the abrogation of the Oslo agreement.

A translation of the post above reads:

Advertisement

Great pain over the murder of Yehuda Shmuel Sherman, may God avenge his blood, who was murdered in defense of the land of Samaria.

Embracing his parents Yehoshua and Sima and all family members, and sharing in their profound grief. The entire people of Israel are with you.

Strengthening the community of Alon Moreh and the residents of Samaria. We will continue to hold on to the land, to build, and to carry on his path.

May his memory be blessed.

Settler violence in the occupied West Bank has increased exponentially since the start of the genocide in Gaza, and has intensified again with the US-Israeli led attacks on Iran.

Advertisement

Settler terrorism grips the West Bank

On 21 March, diplomats from 13 European countries and Canada issued a joint statement condemning the surge in settler attacks against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. They described the violence as “settler terror,” and warned it is contributing to the forced displacement of Palestinian communities. Furthermore, they called on Israel to ensure accountability and protect civilians.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly called on global governing bodies, particularly the UN, to implement resolutions aimed at disarming settlers and holding them accountable for acts of terrorism.

This includes imposing travel bans, freezing their assets, placing them on international terrorism lists, and targeting the financial networks and goods associated with settlements.

Featured images and videos via author

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Kirklees council pushes through privatisation of dementia homes

Published

on

Kirklees council pushes through privatisation of dementia homes

On 17 March 2026, the staff at Castle Grange and Claremont House were formally told the specialist dementia care homes they work in are being transferred to a private provider. Mulberry Care Homes already runs a care home in Kirklees. However, the Care Quality Commission has assessed it as ‘requires improvement’.

Despite this rating Kirklees council is seeking to cut its losses and sell the home. This is leaving residents and their families to pick up the pieces. And, as they await the next steps, they’ve had no formal information from the council.

The ‘Save our Kirklees Dementia Homes from Privatisation’ group has tirelessly campaigned against this sell off. Just as it also fought to prevent Kirklees council from closing them. It is only thanks to this campaign that the homes didn’t close two years ago. But this council was not impressed or deterred from pressing ahead to offload them to the private sector.

The campaign includes close relatives of residents at both homes. And it has fought for the last two-and-a-half years to keep these excellent and caring homes in the public sector. Campaigners have received overwhelming support from the public and local community.

Advertisement

Labour banned questions on dementia homes

The campaigners have taken questions and petitions to the council to press their case. For their
troubles, they feel they have been patronised, ignored and finally silenced by an uncaring council. Six months ago, the ruling Labour group banned ALL councillors from asking any questions on the topic at council meetings.

Campaigners were also prevented from addressing the council and had to resort to standing outside town hall meetings lobbying individual councillors. Left with no alternative, they took their case to the High Court in Leeds in September 2025.

Regrettably the judge ruled in the council’s favour and the campaign appealed to the Court of
Appeal, where they tragically lost again. The rulings were on legal technicalities, not on the morality of selling off these dementia homes from under the residents to a failing private provider. The legal route was the last resort for the campaign and the council has acted with indecent haste
to tell staff they will now be transferring over to a new employer on worse terms and conditions!

Understandably staff, residents and families are devastated. Evidence shows that the private
sector provides worse standards of care compared to the public sector. The council is aware of
this but has chosen to fall back on erroneous figures to try and prove it is too expensive.

Advertisement

The campaign has consistently disputed these figures and produced a detailed dossier to prove its case. The campaign is now assessing its options and will monitor very carefully the new owners and the care they offer.

A spokesperson for ‘Save our Kirklees Dementia Homes from Privatisation’ said:

We all went to Leeds in September for the High Court hearing, and many of us also attended the Appeal hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice on 5 March. We are gutted we lost the case but we have fought all the way and continue to believe very strongly the council is making a huge mistake.

We would like to thank the staff, the community, those councillors who have believed in us and our legal team at Irwin Mitchell for all their support. We are naturally down but not unbowed. We owe it to everyone to ensure this new provider is kept on their toes and that the council fulfils its duty to monitor standards.

For those voting in the elections on 7 May, please ask your candidates where they stand on privatisation of public services and vote accordingly.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Israel must be stopped, says Spanish MP

Published

on

Israel must be stopped, says Spanish MP

Spanish MP Ione Belarra delivered a forceful speech condemning Israel, declaring that it “must be stopped.”

Belarra has often been outspoken, alongside Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, in opposing Israel’s actions in Gaza. She argues that Israel’s military campaign is a genocide and has long called on the international community to act decisively.

She also condemned further Israeli strikes beyond Gaza, specifically their military actions against Iran and Lebanon. Belarra astutely described them as part of a broader and increasingly unlawful escalation. Since late February, Spanish leaders have continued to press other countries to uphold international law and the rules-based global system to little avail.

Refusing to give up, Belarra has now issued a stark and urgent warning to world leaders, insisting that their failure to restrain Israel could lead to wider devastation far beyond Palestine.

Advertisement

Israel is the true threat to global peace and stability

Principled activists and leaders have relentlessly called on international governments to show backbone and act with moral clarity. They argue that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza after decades of occupying Palestinian territories since 1948 and demand that the world confront it now.

Advertisement

They point to Spain – under PM Pedro Sánchez – as setting the pace, with one of the strongest efforts in Europe to hold Israel accountable for its crimes.

This warning from Belarra follows prior moves by Spain to apply political pressure against Israel. The Spanish government have stood out on the world stage for its actions such as the banning of arm sales, refusing to allow access to military bases and recently recalling Spain’s Ambassador from Israel. 

Spain appears to be stepping up its campaign to wake world leaders to what it warns is a dangerous reality: Israel’s aggression will not stop at the Middle East.

Belarra has compared Israel and its genocide against Palestinians to Nazi Germany from the outset:

Advertisement

This adds to a list of powerful speeches given by this courageous Spanish MP; she regularly speaks out against Israel in the Spanish parliament. Here, she has even called NATO a “criminal alliance” and insisted Spain bow out:

 

A reminder of the catastrophic hellscape that has been inflicted on Palestinian civilians at the hands of the IDF and its lackies:

This X post shows the sheer scale of opposition to the US and Israel amongst the Spanish population:

Advertisement

This video shared in the X post shows Israel and the US declaring more countries as ‘enemies’. This reinforces Belarra’s warning that their military reach will eventually extend even further:

Keep going, Spain!

Spain and its elected officials are leading the way internationally in the fight against fascism and violent extremism. Israel and the US are being led by toddler tyrants who prioritise their own self-interest and power over accountability and human cost.

Advertisement

As Ione Belarra warns, this hostile supremacy poses a threat to everyone. Countries with ties to the US – and especially those hosting its military bases – now face the strategic risks those installations have always carried: tools to exert pressure and project power, often at the expense of their own national interests.

Like Spanish citizens, we need principled leadership in the UK – leaders who stand up to genocidal warmongers and say no.

They’ve already sold out our interests for private profit. We must not let them sell out our country to a terrorist state too.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot/Vozpopuli

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

The feminist courage of Dame Jenni Murray

Published

on

The feminist courage of Dame Jenni Murray

Journalist and broadcaster Dame Jenni Murray died last week at the age of 75.

Born in Barnsley in South Yorkshire in 1950, Murray began her journalistic career at BBC Radio Bristol in 1973, before becoming a presenter and reporter for regional news programme, South Today. A warm but probing interviewer, she became a presenter on BBC’s Newsnight from 1983 until 1985, and then on BBC Radio 4’s flagship news programme, Today, in 1987. But it was as the host of Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour, a role she held for over 30 years until she stepped down in 2020, that she was best known.

She was also a prominent feminist voice in the media. Alongside her work on Woman’s Hour, she focussed on women’s issues in her journalism for the Guardian among other outlets, and in her own books, including Is It Me or I It Hot in Here?, tackling everything from menopause to sexist beauty standards. Climbing the ranks at the BBC when it really was a boys’ club, Murray, with her clipped and serious questioning style, was a heroine for many aspiring female journalists.

Advertisement

But it was in 2017 that Murray showed her feminist courage. In an article for The Sunday Times in March 2017, entitled ‘Be trans and be proud – but don’t call yourself a real woman’, Murray outed herself as possibly the only member of the media elite at the time who wasn’t going to get on the ‘transwomen are women’ bandwagon. Murray wrote that ‘it takes more than a sex change and makeup’ to become a woman.

In a long, eloquent article detailing her position, Murray recounted experiences she had had with transwomen – the Reverend Carol Stone and India Willoughby among them – who had disappointed her by clinging to stereotypes of what it meant to be a woman. Murray argued that men, who had enjoyed all the privileges and power that she argued women were often refused, could not suddenly shop in a different section of the department store and call themselves ladies. She described her ‘fury that a male-to-female transsexual could be so ignorant of the politics that have preoccupied women for centuries’. Referencing the British Medical Association’s request for employees to use ‘inclusive’ phrases like ‘chest-feeding’, Murray responded: ‘I breastfed my kids and it was my breast that was cut off when I had cancer. No debate.’

This article would come to define much of Murray’s later career. She faced cancellations and countless protests at several universities where she was scheduled to speak. At Oxford University, protesters hung a ‘transwomen are real women’ sign. At the University of Hull, students decided to drop plans to name a lecture theatre after her, with Hull Students’ Union president claiming that her views made her ineligible as a ‘role model for students’. And trans activists were interviewed on television claiming to be frightened to be in the presence of Murray.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Advertisement

Please wait…

Advertisement

The BBC responded to the trans-activist pressure by preventing Murray from discussing any trans-related issues on Woman’s Hour – a behind-closed-doors decision Murray herself revealed in a 2020 article for the Daily Mail. Murray described stepping away from Woman’s Hour as being ‘free of the leash’.

Murray’s no-nonsense attitude to the issues and challenges facing women, from marital rape to women’s healthcare (Murray herself was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2006), gave her the kind of confidence to challenge trans ideology. Her commonsense challenge to the idea that men could become women with a wardrobe change and a visit to the doctors was a brave and brilliant intervention during a time of madness.

Advertisement

Many of Murray’s former colleagues have celebrated her journalistic integrity since the announcement of her death. Her passing should also provoke some soul-searching among a fair few of them, too – particularly those who have quietly moved TERFside now that it is no longer career-ending. Many failed to stand with Murray when she chose to say what she knew to be true. They looked the other way as she defended women’s rights – just as she had done all her life.

A pioneering journalist, cutting it in what was once a male-dominated industry, Murray remains an inspiration to many. She set a moral, political and journalistic example that others would do well to follow.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025