Great Yarmouth, a place where families gather all year round, come together and visit the seaside, eat ice cream and play on the arcade machines. But deep down the seafront, hidden in the industrial estate, lies a factory that is responsible for making the parts that, without them, the F-35 jets wouldn’t be able to operate. The company is called Spectrum Control LTD.

You won’t find much advertising for it; in fact, if you go to the factory itself, there are no big signs on the doors or obvious branding. But if you dig deep enough into a combination of the company house, export license data put together by the campaign against arms trade, Spectrum has been making and supplying parts for the F-35 jets that have been used in Israel’s genocide of Gaza.

So who owns the place in Great Yarmouth?

From my findings, Spectrum Control LTD is listed online via Companies House under number 02721281 and, on paper, is typically a British company. But it is actually owned by AEA Investors LP, a private equity firm based in New York.

This firm is worth BILLIONS in assets in aerospace, defence and industrial manufacturing. To be precise, this firm goes all the way back to pure American elite power. It was founded in 1968 by the Rockefellers, the Mellon family and the Harriman family.

AEA manages £15 billion in invested capital. AEA took over spectrum control in 2019 from its parent company, API Technologies, which, to them, just sits there alongside handfuls of other businesses in their portfolio.

The directors

There are two directors listed on the company house website. First, we have Neil Snowdon, a British citizen who was given the role in November 2022. He works as Spectrum Controls’ vice president and managing director in the UK and EMEIA region. So in short, he sees the day-to-day at the Great Yarmouth factory. Snowdon’s LinkedIn shows how he is posting about RAF Typhoon upgrades and UK defence supply chains, but he actually has a boss himself; he reports to the US CEO, who is on the company’s executive leadership team. His name?

Richard Dennis Sorelle, sometimes known as Rich, is an American national listed as the other director of Spectrum Control and has been since 2021.

Rich has over 35 years of experience in defence electronics. Before Spectrum Control, he was the CEO and chairman of Abaco Systems, which is, in short, another military electronics supplier. When he took over spectrum control, he said he was looking forward to bringing his experiences in radar and sonar to the company (gross). He did an interview with Microwave Journal, and he described Spectrum Control and its mission as “protecting human life ” See the irony there, considering he’s making parts that help jets kill innocent children in Gaza.

Neither of these men work in Great Yarmouth, and no one from the local community was consulted or informed about this, and inquiries received no response.

Neither Snowdon or Sorelle have commented on the factory’s participation in its F-35 programme.

The invisible loophole

UK companies that ship and supply anything to do with F-35 jets don’t go through normal arms export licensing. What they go through alternatively is something called an open general export licence. What this means is registered companies have authorisation to export unlimited amounts of F-35 related parts to places like Israel without needing to apply for individual licenses.

Don’t believe me? The government’s own OGEL documents confirm this, and the campaign against arms trade has mapped every single UK company registered for this license.

The scary part is we have no idea how much has left the factory in Great Yarmouth, where it went and what aircrafts in has ended up in.

Funny how the UK government, when announcing a partial suspension on arms export licenses to Israel in 2024, seems to exempt F-35 components, giving factories loopholes to be able to still supply F-35 jet parts to countries using them for genocide.

The secret business

So when we think of spectrum control, we think obviously of the factory that’s making the F-35 components, but what if I told you they also run another business called SSIA.

SSIA (secure systems and information assurance), based in Gloucester, not Great Yarmouth, has been designing and making equipment for one of the most secret areas of military tech for well over 30 years, and its name is Tempest.

To put it short, Tempest is short for a NATO/government programme that handles the fact that every device leaks electromagnetic signals, and those signals can be intercepted by rivals, and they can manipulate what’s on the screens, what’s being typed, and what’s being broadcast.

Tempest Tech has been built to counter that.

This is also the first and only company in UK history to be NCSC accredited under GCHQ. And to work here, you have to have complete tight security clearance.

So, Spectrum Controls SSIA section supplies the military, government, and NATO with TEMPEST certified equipment, which includes secure computers, encrypted coms hardware and all of this is owned by the Rockefellers.

Our question is, why is the UK government allowing a Rockefeller-owned company in New York to handle our sensitive data?

The town that never got a say

We all know Great Yarmouth is not the wealthiest place; in fact, it’s one of the most deprived places in the UK. It sits among the bottom 20% of the most economically deprived areas nationally, and it seems to be the target of these awful industries profiting off the murder of children.

And yes, the company does employ people locally, and I’ve witnessed with my own eyes how some of the staff react to the locals trying to raise awareness, and I’m not sure if it’s silence out of fear of not wanting to lose your job because you feel like you have no other choice or just simply not caring.

I want to highlight the people who are locals and are trying to raise awareness about this issue. There’s a group of amazing activists who have been campaigning to get this factory shut down for a while, and they need your help.

When I first started journalism, I went and joined them at one of the protests outside the factory in August of 2025, and I could really feel the urgency for them to get the message across, but because Yarmouth is very far and secluded, people won’t know about it unless it’s amplified, and that’s what I’m doing right now.

The locals should be informed about what companies want to set up factories in their areas and be given a say on whether they want something like an arms factory to be operating in a town that also serves as a holiday destination for families. These companies make millions, and the community in itself is struggling. How about the government invest money in building community centres for these people instead of building factories that aid Israel’s murder mission?

Put the pressure on in Great Yarmouth

I grew up in Norfolk – in fact its funny, I was born there and lived in Great Yarmouth for a year as an adult. To me, I always associated it with the place people came to for the summer. The seafront is full of shops, arcade stalls, and things for families to do. It has one of the most popular high streets, but the work typically runs off seasonal trade, meaning after the summer, most shops shut, and people are left without work. It makes you wonder if this factory is put there on purpose, as people feel like they have no choice but to take the work that’s available to them.

But we still have questions and have sent off an FOI request to the Great Yarmouth Borough Council and ask them to disclose all communications between them and Spectrum Control, and we are still awaiting a response. Because between the Rockerfellers’ New York firm and Norfolk’s trading estate, accountability has gone missing, and I’m on the hunt for it.

And why did the mayor of Yarmouth stand with Snowdon and celebrate the 80th anniversary in 2023 of the site? Did the mayor know what the factory was making, and if she did, why would she endorse such a thing?

For now, all we can do is show up, put pressure on the spectrum control and listen to what the locals want.

By Sip the System

Source link

Democrats aren’t done debating Graham Platner.

Platner’s decisive victory in Maine’s Democratic Senate primary quelled for now any serious discussion that he could be replaced as the party’s nominee in the wake of a recent bout of scandals. The party’s campaign arms were quick to indicate support for him after the race was called Tuesday night. Progressives took a victory lap while arguing their colleagues need to coalesce around the Maine nominee.

But a small yet notable faction of Capitol Hill Democrats still has qualms about the oysterman’s tumultuous past that has rattled some Maine voters — and what it could mean for their chances of defeating Sen. Susan Collins and taking back the upper chamber in November.

On Wednesday, several senators stopped short of outright endorsing Platner when asked by POLITICO.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a potential 2028 contender who has kept his distance from Platner so far, said he thought Platner can defeat Collins and that “the path for us winning back control of the Senate runs through Maine.” But he still declined to endorse Platner, saying that he’d yet to meet or speak with the nominee. Asked whether Platner had done enough to address his scandals, Kelly said the oysterman has “got things to explain.”

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), who had previously endorsed Gov. Janet Mills in the Maine Senate race, and Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) also declined to endorse Platner on Wednesday. Cortez Masto rattled off other top Democratic targets in Iowa, North Carolina and Alaska, while Duckworth said she’s “focused on the Midwest.”

And Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), a frequent critic of his own party who has repeatedly raised concerns about Platner, said Maine Democrats have made their choice but “I would never [endorse Platner]. I’ll be a Democrat to refuse to carry water for that.”

Even Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), who said Wednesday he would support all Democratic Senate nominees, suggested the oysterman still has “work to do” to address his scandals.

“The challenge that Platner has is the challenge that any candidate has, and it’s to address in a direct way both personal and political issues that are legitimate questions for the voters. He’s got to do that,” said Welch, who had also met with Platner last week to privately urge him to address voters’ questions head on. “Until the election is over, he’s got work to do, every day in every way.”

Not every senator traditionally endorses in every race. But Democrats’ chances of taking back the Senate hinge squarely on being able to defeat Collins, the only Republican senator seeking reelection this year in a state former Vice President Kamala Harris won in 2024. The party has hoped to knock off Collins many times before only to come up short — and it’s now putting its hopes on Platner, whose campaign has electrified Maine and generated unprecedented grassroots support, but also faced a litany of controversies.

Continued Democratic division could be a boon for Republicans who are already launching into general-election attacks on Platner. Collins has repeatedly won reelection with a coalition that includes a substantial share of independents and Democratic voters, especially moderate women.

Platner’s rise came without the backing of the Democratic establishment: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) recruited Mills, who suspended her campaign in April after poor polling and fundraising numbers.

The political newcomer’s ability to challenge the establishment was part of his appeal to Maine voters, as he argued the Democratic Party had lost its way and needed to return to its working-class roots.

Some well-timed endorsements helped Platner in key moments in his primary campaign. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) early backing helped put him on the map. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) gave his campaign a boost earlier this year as he faced renewed questions about a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol. And Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) even helped him fundraise in the aftermath of the most recent allegations.

The New York Times last week reported that several of Platner’s ex-girlfriends alleged toxic patterns of behavior, including one who said he grabbed her in ways that left marks. Before that, his campaign acknowledged he had exchanged sexual messages with other women while married. Last fall, his uncovered Reddit history included numerous offensive comments. And Platner owned up to having a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol, although he said he was unaware of its meaning.

Platner has denied being violent with women and has argued that his past poor behavior reflects a difficult time in his life, as he struggled with post-traumatic stress disorder after leaving the military.

“I’ve made mistakes in my life, mistakes that I regret, that I lived with, that I continue to learn from,” he said in a Tuesday night victory speech. “I’m still far from perfect, but every day I wake up and I try to be a little bit better and a little bit kinder than I was the day before.”

Following his Tuesday primary victory, Platner’s Senate supporters urged their colleagues to rally behind him.

“They need to coalesce, they need to coalesce around Platner,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told reporters on Wednesday, arguing Platner has “taken responsibility” for his past actions.

Sanders told reporters on Capitol Hill he was confident that Democrats would come around.

“Platner won a landslide victory last night, and I am quite confident that Democrats who want to regain the Senate will be supporting him as the Democratic nominee,” he said.

At least one lawmaker who had not previously endorsed Platner was ready to support him.

“Here’s a man who said ‘I made mistakes, I apologize for them, I am going to earn the trust of my constituents,’” said Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii). “That says a lot in contrast to the president, who never admits doing anything that is untoward, and who just blames everybody else, and who prosecutes people. I think Maine voters have expressed themselves and they’re willing to give him a chance.”

Other Democrats who had been skeptical of Platner’s viability in the general election — and had considered pressuring him to drop out — now appear resigned to him staying in the race.

“It was obviously a strong result for him which I think should quiet some of the immediate anxiety, but that will return if more revelations come out,” said one senior Democratic Senate aide, granted anonymity to discuss the race candidly. “Seems like even his supporters are not really defending the conduct, so [it’s] kind of incumbent on him to try to address more fully and move on.”

Another Senate Democratic aide, also granted anonymity to speak candidly about the race, agreed: “He weathered the storm, but is he out of it? Primary night didn’t answer that question. The next several weeks will determine whether this campaign is a referendum on his personal conduct or Susan Collins aligning with an unpopular GOP agenda that is hurting Mainers.”

Republicans have indicated they will try to make Platner’s controversies central to the race, with the National Republican Senatorial Committee and a pro-Collins super PAC launching ads that highlight some of the Democrat’s past Reddit comments. Platner, meanwhile, in his first general election ad on Wednesday, went after the “Epstein class” but did not mention Collins.

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) said her thinking on the race had not changed from a few weeks ago, saying she plans to “work with whoever the Mainers elect, period.”

“The way that this president has completely railroaded my Republican colleagues in this body, they don’t deserve to run a separate branch of government,” she said. “And if we want any chance of putting a check and balance on him that involves electing Platner.”

Asked whether Platner needs to do more to address his past scandals, Slotkin simply replied: “I just hope I’m not caught again live on TV answering the same questions about bad behavior.”

Jordain Carney contributed to this report.

Source link

The US launched revenge-strikes after an Iranian drone knocked out an Apache helicopter on 9 June. The US hit two reservoirs in southern Iran, leaving tens of thousands without drinking water in 40-degree heat. The Geneva Convention insists military forces must distinguish between civilian and military infrastructure.

The attack was reported as a footnote by legacy media. NBC said:

Around 20,000 Iranians have lost access to drinking water after two reservoirs were reportedly struck in U.S. strikes, according to the Iranian judiciary’s official news agency, Mizan.

The news agency reported the development after Abdolhamid Hamzehpour, CEO of Hormozgan Province Water and Wastewater Co., said two concrete water storage reservoirs had been hit in Sirik county.

NBC cited the Mizan news agency saying:

that with high temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius or 104 degrees Fahrenheit, conditions for residents had “become extremely difficult and critical.”

Adding:

Hamzehpour had earlier told state-run IRIB news agency that teams were working to implement alternative measures to ensure access to drinking water.

US strikes for revenge, pure and simple

The latest wave of strikes were in response to the shooting down of a US Apache helicopter on 9 June. The Canary reported:

The US military had originally claimed that a technical fault caused the crash. The helicopter’s crew survived and was picked up from the sea.

Adding:

The ‘Longbow’ variant of the apache is set up for surveillance and for support of special forces. Former US special forces officer, Lt Col Antony Aguilar, described it as hard to shoot down and said that similar aircraft had been used a week earlier to attack Iranian civilian vessels.

In a move typical of the US president:

Trump attacked Iran for successfully defending itself and has described the escalated aggression as “defensive”.

US-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. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The US has achieved none of its original war aims. Iran predictably closed the Straits of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, once attacked — creating a global energy crisis. Far from being defeated, Iran has 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.

As Trump flails, seeking an exit from his war of choice, Iranian civilians continue to suffer. The US reservoir strikes may constitute a war crime. The US and Israel have operated with impunity carrying out hundreds — if not thousands — of other near-daily attacks on civilians. A decaying empire is a dangerous thing, as the people of the region know only too well.

Featured image via U.S. Navy via Getty Images

By Joe Glenton

Source link

MAJOR SHIFT: Last week’s conclusion of Albany’s legislative session left Democratic state lawmakers poised for the biggest shakeup in their ranks since they assumed one-party control in 2019.

Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes is retiring at the end of the year, opening up the No. 2 job for only the second time since Carl Heastie became speaker 11 years ago.

State Sen. Mike Gianaris is on his way out too. His departure will leave open the role of Democratic Senate Campaign Committee chair, which he’s held since he was a senator-elect in 2010. It will also pave the way for a new floor leader and Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins’ deputy.

On top of that, Senate Democrats are about to become the first conference in state history to bump up against term limits.

Rules enacted in 2009 imposed eight-year caps on the majority leader and committee chairs. No party has remained in power long enough to be impacted since then, but the rules will soon apply to Stewart-Cousins and up to a dozen of her members.

“I’d probably have to,” state Sen. Liz Krueger said when asked if she’d vote to scrap the term limits. “Because it would mean Andrea couldn’t remain leader. And I do not actually accept the concept where Andrea doesn’t remain leader.”

Krueger is one of seven impacted chairs surveyed in recent months who unanimously said they want Stewart-Cousins to remain. But Democrats haven’t yet settled on what should happen to other top jobs.

“It’s really a question of ‘do you change all the term limits for everybody while you’re changing them for leadership, or do you allow for some new opportunities at the committee level?’” Investigations and Government Operations Committee Chair James Skoufis said. “I don’t know where I land on that.”

“The level of expertise I’ve developed, it’s not because I’m better or smarter than anyone else, I’ve just been in it longer,” state Sen. Gustavo Rivera said of the “deep and dark and mysterious” realm of policy he oversees as Health Committee Chair. “I would be hard pressed to find somebody in the Senate who would be able to do the job on day one.”

Gianaris’ departure might lead to widespread shuffling, regardless. And while Krueger is running again, she missed the conclusion of this year’s session after an April stroke. It remains to be seen whether she’ll return to the grueling job of being the top Democrat on the Finance Committee as she’s been since 2011 — possibly leading to more musical chairs at the top.

Stewart-Cousins said she’s looking for a deputy “who can bring the same types of talents and skills that Sen. Gianaris has brought.” Names that came up in surveys of legislators and lobbyists include state Sens. Jamaal Bailey, Andrew Gounardes and Shelley Mayer. Still, there isn’t a widespread consensus.

There’s more agreement over who might replace Peoples-Stokes. Upstaters have held the job since 1979, providing some balance to speakers from New York City over the years. The pick will need to be somebody who can work well with Heastie, and conventional wisdom holds they should have a good amount of tenure. Over a dozen insiders mentioned the same three names as fitting each of those criteria: Syracuse’s Pamela Hunter, Rochester’s Harry Bronson and Albany’s John McDonald.

Heastie, however, isn’t making a firm commitment to tradition.

“The requirement that the majority leader comes from upstate, that’s more of a y’all thing,” he told reporters. “I inherited a great majority leader who happened to be upstate in Joe Morelle, one of my closest friends. And then Crystal was somebody I knew even before I was elected, and she’s been amazing. But I don’t know if I feel limited to if it’d have to be somebody from upstate. It could be Long Island, it could be the Hudson Valley — I haven’t even really thought about it.” — Bill Mahoney

From the Capitol

MONSERRATE LEADS PACK: The state’s Public Campaign Finance Board issued $1.96 million in matching funds payments Tuesday, marking the final day such outlays will be issued before the June 23 primary.

The scandal-plagued Hiram Monserrate was the state’s top beneficiary of public funds this week.

He’s running to return to the state Senate against the incumbent state Sen. Jessica Ramos and Assemblymember Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas. Monserrate is the only sitting legislator to be removed by his colleagues in the past century, following his 2009 misdemeanor conviction arising from a domestic violence incident. Since then, this is his ninth comeback bid.

Overall, his haul trails the $348,000 in matching funds that Gonzalez-Rojas has received to date. Ramos has taken in $128,000 in recent months.

Read more from POLITICO Pro’s Bill Mahoney here.

FROM CITY HALL

BROKEN PROMISES?: Transit advocates are intensifying their pressure on Mayor Zohran Mamdani to set aside more money to lower bus and subway fares. Groups of straphangers, like Riders Alliance, are now portraying the mayor as a promise breaker if he doesn’t support an expansion of the Fair Fares program, which offers discounts to low-income New Yorkers.

“New Yorkers are hurting, especially low-income commuters whose work we all depend on, and this is the mayor’s last chance to lower costs for transit this year, after emphasizing the importance of affordable public transit for his entire career,” Riders Alliance spokesperson Danny Pearlstein said in a text message.

Free buses was one of Mamdani’s three most prominent campaign pledges — alongside child care for all and a rent freeze — but the one he’s seemed to make the least headway on.

Riders Alliance, along with City Council members Tiffany Caban, Shahana Hanif and others, is holding a rally at noon tomorrow outside City Hall to “demand” the mayor “keep his promise to lower costs” — more pointed language than advocates have used publicly in the past.

While Mamdani’s free bus plan is on hold in large part because Albany isn’t on board, the City Council has backed more money for Fair Fares. The mayor, however, is reluctant to take that path because he generally doesn’t support policies where access is based on how much money people make. — Ry Rivard

WORKING THE REFS: Mamdani has a bone to pick about the officiating at Monday’s NBA finals game, which the Knicks lost to the Spurs.

“Crime is going down in New York City, but what we saw the other night did feel criminal,” Mamdani quipped to reporters today. “You just look at the disparity on fouls that were being called. I think many New Yorkers came away from that game with a very clear reflection of the absence of fair refereeing.”

Despite the mayor’s fandom, Madison Square Garden, the home of the Knicks, released a statement Tuesday calling Mamdani and NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch “party poopers” for instituting tighter security for a watch party outside the arena tonight.

Asked about it, Mamdani said the level of security planned is “in line with the measures that the NYPD uses for gatherings of this size, whether it be July 4 or New Year’s Eve.”

“This team has brought an extraordinary amount of energy, pride, excitement to every corner of our city,” the mayor said. “We want this to be a memorable night for all the right reasons.”

A watch party scheduled outside MSG for Game 3 on Monday night was moved to Bryant Park thanks to President Trump attending the game.

Asked whether he holds Trump responsible for the Knicks’ loss, Mamdani laughed — but declined to blame the president.

“I’ve made clear my complaints about the refs,” Mamdani said. “I’m hopeful tonight we’re going to see a different game.” — Janaki Chadha

FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL

WHAT TWEETS?: Darializa Avila Chevalier, Mamdani’s pick to unseat Rep. Adriano Espaillat, has come under plenty of fire for her old social media posts.

Mamdani claims he hasn’t seen them.

The posts in question include tweets where Chevalier wrote “F—k Kamala Harris,” criticized black and Arab men for “fetishizing ugly colonizer women,” and described wiping her hand on the American flag. They’re the subject of an Espaillat ad in which a narrator says, “Meet the real Darializa, the one she tried to delete.”

Asked about her social media imprint, Mamdani told reporters, “No, I have not seen those tweets.”

“What I’ve heard from her, and what I know a lot of others in the district have heard from her, is that her views have evolved, and that the campaign that she’s running on is reflective of what she’s going to be fighting for,” Mamdani said.

The mayor has opted against endorsing in other races, including the one for the Manhattan congressional seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler.

Gracie Mansion is in that district, and while Mamdani said he plans to vote in the Democratic primary, he has not yet decided on who he’ll back. The candidates include Assemblymembers Micah Lasher and Alex Bores, Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg and Trump critic George Conway.

“I’m one of those classic yet-to-make-a-decision voters that frustrate campaigns so dearly,” the mayor said. — Janaki Chadha

IN OTHER NEWS

— THERE’S NO ‘I’ IN TEAM: Brad Lander says he is not endorsing fellow congressional challenger Darializa Avila Chevalier, despite putting out a joint “Mamdani’s team” ad with her. (Jewish Insider)

— DIY BALLOT LINE: Shut out of major third party endorsements, candidates for NY-21 Republican Anthony Constantino and Democrat Blake Gendebien are battling in court over the validity of their made up ballot line names. (Times Union)

— NO EASY EXIT: Uber is suing New York City to block a new driver protection law, arguing it would force the company to keep dangerous drivers on the road. (Reuters)

Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.

Source link

CND is calling on the government to stop wasting public money on its nuclear weapons black hole.

This comes after the latest spending report from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) revealed the UK is now spending more on its nuclear weapons than Russia.

Collectively, the nine nuclear weapons states spent a record $119bn in 2025 on maintaining, modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals. This was an increase of 19% ($16.8 billion) on the 2024 bill.

UK moves into nuclear weapons top three

The UK overtook Russia as the world’s third biggest spender, spending $12.6bn (£9.6bn), an increase of 17%.

This spending includes:

• Operating costs of Britain’s current four Vanguard nuclear-armed submarines.
• Building the replacement to Vanguard – the Dreadnought submarine.
• Maintenance of Britain’s nuclear weapons stockpile.
• Development of a new nuclear warhead, Project Astraea.

It doesn’t include the costs of the 12 F-35A nuclear-capable fighter jets the government announced it was purchasing in June 2025.

This shocking surge in nuclear spending comes as the government’s own Public Accounts Committee criticised the MoD for a lack of transparency over its ‘ever-increasing nuclear expenditure’.

Nuclear weapons spending is expected to rise to 20% of the total MoD budget for 2025–26, and increase to up to 25% in coming years.

According to ICAN, the top nuclear spender globally was again the US which spent $69.2bn. This was an increase of 22% from 2024 and totalled more than all the other nuclear weapons states combined.

China was second, spending $13.5bn, an increase of 7%. Behind the UK was Russia with an increase of 6% to $9.5bn. Of the others, France spent $7.7bn, India $2.8bn, Pakistan $1.5bn, Israel £1.2bn, and North Korea $656m.

The report also found that arms companies involved in the manufacture of UK weapons had sought to influence government policy. According to open access data cited in the report, senior government figures met with representatives of the following arms companies:

• Airbus.
• Amentum.
• Babcock International.
• BAE Systems.
• Bechtel.
• Boeing.
• General Dynamics.
• Honeywell International.
• Leidos.
• Leonardo.
• Lockheed Martin.
• Peraton.
• Rolls Royce.
• RTX (Raytheon).
• Safran.
• Thales.

The report noted that Airbus and BAE Systems, who had 44 and 35 meetings respectively, also included meetings with the prime minister’s office.

CND general secretary Sophie Bolt said:

This is a timely report that comes when the British government is planning to make savage cuts to public spending in order to fund more hikes to military spending. Britain’s nuclear weapons are a black hole, swallowing up even greater proportions of the Ministry of Defence’s already ballooning budget.

It is Britain’s replacement of its nuclear weapons system which is driving these huge nuclear weapons spending increases. This is contributing to a much more dangerous world where the threat of these world-ending weapons being used in war is the highest it has been since the Cold War.

Advertisement

Far from keeping us safe, Britain’s nuclear-armed submarines are totally dependent on the US administration, which ties us even more closely to Trump’s reckless leadership that is dragging the world into more and more reckless wars that could go nuclear.

With the government’s upcoming Defence Investment Plan expected to give at least £15bn more to the military, it’s time to end the wasteful spending on war and nuclear weapons and redirect it into tackling the real security issues we face – from climate breakdown and the looming cost of living crisis.

Featured image via Andrew Linnett / MoD Crown Copyright via Getty Images

By The Canary

Source link

Source link

The Mental Health Foundation has released The Foundation Reports: The state of mental health inequality in the UK, based on data following 40,000 individuals over 15 years.

The report found higher levels of poor mental health than recently reported in other datasets. One in four adults in the UK (25%) now experiences mental distress. That’s 14 million people. This has risen from 17% since the period immediately following the 2008 financial crisis. And that means an additional 4.8 million people now experience poor mental health just 16 years later.

The evaluation of the Understanding Society dataset involved examining data gathered from 2009 to 2024 to discover what is driving unequal levels of mental health across the country. The size and depth of the dataset allowed researchers to evaluate how these factors impacted different social groups. Across the fifteen years, people in financial distress experienced the greatest rise in poor mental health.

Mental health inequality

In the most recent data, more than half of people who were financially struggling (54%) experienced poor mental health, more than three times the rate of those who are financially comfortable (17%).

The gap between the poorest and richest people has increased by 50% the last 15 years. There was a 28.9 percentage point gap in 2009. But that’s risen to a 43.4 percentage point gap in the most recent data.

Women and young people were also found to have been disproportionately affected. Nearly one in three young people (31%) are now experiencing poor mental health. This compares with less than one in four (23%) people aged 25 and above. More than one in four women (28%) experienced poor mental health, compared to one in five (21%) men.

Mental health inequalities between these groups have also risen steeply since 2009. This is particularly notable for younger people, for whom there was no inequality in 2009, but who now experience a 7.5% higher rate of mental distress than older groups.

The Foundation Reports follows a Delphi process, conducted by the Mental Health Foundation, in which more than 40 experts in the field identified which factors drive unequal outcomes the most.

By combining the results of the Delphi process with the evaluation of Understanding Society data, The Foundation Reports’ authors found that previous governments’ austerity policies, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the subsequent cost-of-living crisis have been the main factors driving the widening of mental health inequality.

Mark Rowland, chief executive at the Mental Health Foundation, said:

The Foundation Reports exposes how financial inequality has become intertwined with poor mental health in the UK. Almost 5 million more people are experiencing poor mental health than in 2009. It is people who are less well off, younger, or women who are hardest hit and paying the greatest price.

Clearly, decisions of successive UK governments have made mental health outcomes worse. Examples include austerity, the response to Covid-19, and failing to address the cost-of-living. These have contributed to record levels of poor mental health, particularly among vulnerable groups.

This is a UK-wide issue. We’ve found that financial inequality in the UK is the biggest driver of unequal mental health outcomes in all four nations. The UK and devolved governments’ failure to support those on lower incomes is one of the largest public health mistakes in decades. Policies have also disproportionately damaged women and younger people’s mental health.

Advertisement

The announcement of a mental health plan for England provides a vital opportunity for government to turn the tide. To reduce mental health problems, all UK governments must prioritise tackling poverty and access to debt advice.

We need better support for people returning to work, and greater security for those who will never be able to do so. Governments must also support women and younger people through policies that address the specific challenges these groups face, like access to housing.

Featured image via

By The Canary

Source link

Andrew Giuliani, head of the White House team tasked with organising the 2026 World Cup, defended the US authorities’ decision to bar Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan and a number of administrative officials from the Iranian national team from entering the United States, stressing that these measures were taken for “very valid reasons”, according to AFP, reporting on a seminar organised by the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.

The comments come at a time of growing questions regarding the security measures taken by the US in the days leading up to the start of the tournament, which it is co-hosting with Canada and Mexico, particularly following the barring of Artan from entering the country despite holding a valid visa, and the refusal to grant visas to a number of officials accompanying the Iranian national team.

Why did the US bar the Somali referee from the World Cup?

Giuliani has reignited the controversy surrounding the case of Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, after he was detained at Miami airport for several hours before being returned to Turkey, thereby preventing him from officiating at World Cup matches.

The US official refused to disclose the specific reasons that led the authorities to take the decision, but he stressed that the ban was not a random measure.

He said:

There was a referee who was not allowed to enter. I cannot go into details, but what I can say is that it was for a very good reason.

He added that US authorities are balancing the hosting of a global event open to the public and sporting delegations with the need to uphold national security requirements.

He explained:

We are trying to strike a balance between welcoming everyone and ensuring that any malicious actors attempting to enter the country under the guise of the World Cup are unable to reach the United States.

Artan, who was named African Referee of the Year for 2025 and has officiated matches in major continental and international tournaments, was set to make his World Cup debut before being barred from entering the US.

Iranian officials denied entry to the US

On the Iranian front, Giuliani confirmed that all members of the Iranian national team’s coaching staff had been granted entry to the United States, whilst a number of administrative officials had been denied visas.

He said:

All members of the Iranian national team’s technical staff are allowed to enter. There are Iranian officials who cannot enter, and that is also for very valid reasons.

He noted that some people might identify themselves as part of sporting or technical delegations, whilst having links to other entities, adding:

As you can imagine, there are people who claim to be coaches, but they may not be.

He continued that some of the names subject to scrutiny may be directly linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, without providing further details or public evidence to support those claims.

Giuliani also revealed that 35 teams have so far managed to enter the United States without any players or coaches being barred from participating, emphasising that the bans were limited to a small number of officials and administrators.

These statements mark the first public justification by a senior US official for the decisions that sparked widespread controversy ahead of the biggest World Cup in history, at a time when US authorities continue to refrain from disclosing the detailed reasons behind the ban on the Somali referee and certain Iranian officials from entering the country.

Featured image via Jay Biggerstaff/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

The Green Party has opened up a staggering lead with 18-24 year olds according to one poll:

POLL | Greens lead with 18-24 year olds:

Grn: 35% (+17)
Lab: 19% (-22)
Ref: 17% (+8)
Con: 8% (-)
Lib: 7% (-9)
Your: 4% (+4)

(Source: @focaldataHQ)
—
+/- vs GE2024 data pic.twitter.com/L0LBqjcjGP

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 9, 2026

It’s almost as if they’re the only party which is acknowledging the issues young people face.

Meeting needs

The above isn’t the only poll to have shown the Greens leading with young people. This, from March, shows the party leading with everyone under the tender age of 65:

NEW | Greens lead with all voters under 65, reveals latest YouGov survey:

— 18-64s —
Grn: 26%
Ref: 20%
Lab: 17%
Con: 13%
Lib: 14%

— Over 65s —
Ref: 33%
Con: 26%
Lab: 15%
Lib: 14%
Grn: 6%

Poll: @YouGov, 1-2 March pic.twitter.com/Kaa1pBYBJ3

Advertisement

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) March 3, 2026

It’s not hard to see why.

Reform and the Tories mostly target retirees. This older generation is largely secure, having bought their houses at rock bottom prices. While that’s great for them, it does also make them more vulnerable to the message that ‘people are coming to steal what’s yours‘. Young people, meanwhile, can’t afford to buy their own homes, and as such they’ve nothing to conserve – excluding them from the conservative instincts of their grandparents.

Labour’s plan in government has been to pursue changes so marginal that no one even notices them. They’ve also completely abandoned young people on issues like the minimum wage:

Page 45 of Labours 2024 manifesto stated: "Labour will also remove the discriminatory age bands so all adults are entitled to the same minimum wage"

Pat McFadden is asked, when are you going to do this?

McFadden says its not up to the govt to do it. pic.twitter.com/RSVJaZvf7x

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) May 31, 2026

Advertisement

Under this Labour government, young people are facing an under-employment crisis (one which began with the Tories, to be fair).

As Politics UK reported:

– Mid- and lower-skilled jobs have fallen by around 1.6 million over the past 20 years

– Hospitality vacancies have nearly halved in the last 4 years

Advertisement

– Apprenticeships for 16-24-year-olds have fallen by 35% since the Apprenticeship Levy was introduced in 2017

– The proportion of 16-17-year-olds in paid work has nearly halved from 35% in 2006 to 19% today

– If every current inactive 18-24-year-old was in full-time work, this would contribute an additional £38 billion to UK GDP

– 58% of inactive young people (6 in 10) have never had a job

Advertisement

And as we reported in turn:

As life has gotten more expensive in the UK, many young people are living at home for longer. This means fewer of them need to take the dead-end jobs that many of us accepted to ensure we could pay the rent. The knock-on effect is young people have less disposable income, and as a result they don’t go out, meaning fewer jobs in the hospitality sector. Increasing the minimum wage would better incentivise work, which would better drive economic activity.

So this is what the young can expect under Labour and the Tories:

• Live with your parents.
• Be in student debt for most of your working life.
• Struggle to get a job.
• Be blamed for everything wrong with the country.

In other words, it’s increasingly hard for young people to have hope for the future. And as such, it’s easy to see why the Greens are proving to be so popular.

Greens messaging

These are the sort of messages that Zack Polanski and the Green Party are putting out:

Rising rents, cost of further education, the climate crisis.

There's lots for young people to worry about.

Yet they have a plan & the determination to end Rip off Britain.

Join us: https://t.co/Q27Jy5eX7z pic.twitter.com/EBAKibIOu3

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) May 28, 2026

Advertisement

"Austerity is a false economy. If you don't invest in young people, if you burden them with student debt rather than public investment, that's why we get the kind of problems we've got."

Zack Polanski on why investing in young people matters. pic.twitter.com/H7pqhJ1PhH

— The Green Party (@TheGreenParty) February 19, 2026

Advertisement

With the establishment parties implicitly arguing that ‘things can only get worse’, it’s easy to see why the Greens are cutting through.

Featured image via Jon Rowley (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

A 14-year-old activist stood up to an Israel supporter’s aggression during an assault in Montreal, Canada yesterday, 9 June 2026. The aggressor was a woman known as Sandra allegedly associated with white supremacist media. The Canadian government continues to support Israel’s genocide.

Embarrassment in Montreal

As the young man filmed the assault, the woman tried repeatedly and unsuccessfully to grab his phone and intimidate him. Uncowed, he turned his attention to her companions, embarrassing one man enough to have him claim that he is “no bloody Zionist”:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by F̷R̷E̷E̷ P̷E̷O̷P̷L̷E̷ P̷O̷W̷E̷R̷ (@freepeoplepower)

One observer commented:

A Zionist woman named Sandra ATTACKED a 14 YEAR OLD activist in Montreal, Canada. A grown adult assaulting a CHILD, she definitely represents what Israel stands for.

Featured image via CityNewsMontreal

By Skwawkbox

Source link