The Libyan abductors of ten Global Sumud land convoy volunteers kidnapped on 24 May 2026 have extended their illegal captivity for another thirty days. The ten were abducted near Sirte despite having previously agree safe passage with aid bound for Gaza. The extension is the second imposed on them by Libya’s Internal Security Agency (ISA).

Organisers have described the “political hostage taking” as outrageous and a “blatant attack on international solidarity with Palestine”. The group is demanding action from the volunteers’ governments and others to pressure the ISA into freeing the captives. The ISA has released footage showing the victims being transferred after the extension:

Gaza — Widespread repression

The abductions form part of a wider — and accelerating — criminalisation of Palestinian solidarity and global resistance to Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Supporters are asked urgently to:

Pressure officials to act NOW to secure the safe release of these citizens of Spain, Poland, the United States, Argentina, Uruguay, Portugal, Tunisia, and Italy.

Mahmoud Shalaby, regional researcher at human rights organisation Amnesty International said:

At a time when Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are grappling with Israel’s ongoing genocide and catastrophic humanitarian conditions, it is utterly disgraceful that individuals seeking to deliver humanitarian assistance and end Israel’s unlawful blockade have been met with arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance and prosecution on bogus charges in Libya.

No one should be punished for undertaking peaceful humanitarian action and trying to stop human rights abuses. The Libyan Arab Armed Forces must ensure the immediate and unconditional release of the activists, and in the meantime ensure that they have prompt and regular access to their families, consular representatives, lawyers and any medical care they require.

The abductees’ home nations are Argentina, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, Uruguay and USA.

Featured image via GlobalSumud

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Source link

In Russell T Davies’ new drama Tip Toe, Alan Cumming and David Morrissey play feuding neighbours whose turf war spirals out of control with tragic consequences.

But in real life, it turns out the pair are lifelong chums.

Outside of Tip Toe, Alan and David have been friends for around 40 years and, in fact, were even neighbours for a long time.

Speaking to BBC News in the lead-up to Tip Toe’s release, David explained: “We have to do some pretty tough stuff, but the great thing about being with an actor who is a friend is that you can really push it.”

Advertisement

He added that after shooting a “very confrontational” scene, he and Alan would be “hugging each other and making sure each other are alright”.

Alan also told ITV’s This Morning that his friendship with David “really helped” them get through what might otherwise have been quite a difficult shoot due to the show’s heavy subject matter.

In a separate interview, Russell told The Hollywood Reporter: “It turned out [Alan has] been best friends with David Morrissey for 40 years, and they’d never appeared on screen together.

“When they did their first little scene on Canal Street, we all gave them a round of applause. It was such a lovely moment.”

Advertisement

Alan West/Hogan Media/Shutterstock

The Bafta winner also told Channel 4 that it was Alan who suggested that David could play Clive, having already been cast as Leo in the early stages of the creative process.

“He said, ‘oh, I’ve sent the script to Dave’. And we were like, ‘brilliant, imagine getting David Morrissey as well’,” Russell recalled. “And it happened!”

Russell enthused: “The fact that that they’re friends in real life, it just shows how great actors they are because they fucking hate each other [in the show] and it’s visceral and uncomfortable.

“[Being friends] gave them a lot of freedom, I think. They didn’t have to spend time getting to know each other, so I think they felt very free to go for it.”

Advertisement

He added: “They’ve been mates for 40 years, so they knew they could go for it. And I think there’s a real boldness in what they do together.”

The brutal finale of Tip Toe premiered on Channel 4’s streaming service over the weekend, with Russell previously opening up to HuffPost UK about what went into the unflinching scene.

Source link

Vegan campaign group Viva! says its latest survey reveals a major transparency problem within the UK egg industry, as the government mulls over a potential cage ban.

Underpinning this statement is an eye-opening statistic. Almost three-quarters (74%) of UK shoppers are unaware that ‘enriched’ colony cages are used in the UK.

Katie Robinson, campaigns manager at Viva!, explains:

We asked 2,000 members of the public a simple question. And in doing so we’ve highlighted a deeply worrying disconnect between what consumers believe to be true and the realities of animal farming.

Brits consume 14.5bn eggs a year, yet most have no idea how they are produced. That’s no accident. The egg industry shouts about supposedly idyllic free range farms and completely omits the hens trapped in cages.

Advertisement

A general lack of transparency across the whole supply chain is bolstered by concerted efforts by the egg industry to obscure the facts. Consumers are denied the information they need to make informed decisions. That must change.

Cages weren’t banned in 2012

Many consumers think all cages were banned in 2012. In reality, barren ‘battery’ cages were replaced by larger, ‘enriched’ colony cages, capable of holding 40-80 birds each. Under current guidelines, each hen is given slightly less usable space than an A4 piece of paper.

They spend their entire lives under artificial lights, in rows of cages within vast, industrial sheds, deprived of the ability to display natural behaviours.

Currently, around 7.3 million egg-laying hens are trapped inside these cages, with approximately 17% of the UK’s egg supply stemming from caged birds.

While the public’s understanding of UK cage use is low, previous data from Bryant Research shows that nearly all those (94%) who are aware of ‘enriched’ colony cages are strongly against them.

Viva! is therefore deeply concerned that consumers are unwittingly buying eggs produced in a manner they find cruel – and would avoid if they knew the truth.

The animal advocacy organisation is one of many calling for much clearer food labelling requirements so shoppers can see how an animal lived before they were slaughtered and packaged for a supermarket shelf.

Even farmers are admitting that the industry needs to be more transparent. In a recent article in the Western Morning News, Paul Kelly of Kelly Turkey Breeders said:

We have to accept that things can be ugly on farm, from feather pecking to killing and plucking – we have to do a better job of educating consumers about the realities of farming.

Cracking the cage secret

The poll was conducted as part of Viva!’s 2026 Cracked campaign. The campaign’s primary aims are to raise awareness of the plight of caged hens and maintain pressure on the government to follow through on its commitment to phase out ‘enriched’ colony cages, a pledge outlined in the government’s Animal Welfare Strategy for England.

Despite huge public backing for a ban, the National Farmers’ Union and British Egg Industry Council have both pushed back hard on proposals. And the much-anticipated outcome of a major public consultation has already suffered delays. Defra says it will deliver its verdict in “the summer”.

Viva! activists have been tirelessly campaigning for a ban on ‘enriched’ colony cages, organising dozens of public outreach events across the UK, protesting in Parliament Square, securing prominent media coverage of Viva! Campaigns’ caged hen facility investigation and even canvassing celebrities and influencers for support.

Thousands of letters calling for a ban have also been sent by constituents to their MPs, making it clear that this is a welfare issue the animal-loving British public cares deeply about.

Robinson adds:

There’s still time for people to support our Cracked campaign while we await a response to the government consultation. These beautiful, sensitive birds will never know freedom. They can’t stretch, dustbathe, enjoy the sun on their backs or the dirt beneath their claws.

Caged egg systems take everything from them; all these hens have is people who care enough to fight for them.

I’d urge everyone shocked by what they’ve read here to take 30 seconds out of their day to write to their MP and demand change. Without you, millions more hens could face a lifetime of misery in cages.

Viva! has created a letter template supporters can use to contact their MP quickly and easily. Visit viva.org.uk/mp-ban-cages to write to yours now, before it’s too late.

Featured image via Viva!

By The Canary

Source link

Predictably enough, the  Westminster right wing and the DUP did have to turn it  into a row about the border. It was quickly revealed that the Somali  (whoops correction) the Sudanese suspect entered NI illegally from the south and was  granted leave to remain three years ago. Cue firestorm over  immigration policy and in particular -wouldn’t you know it? –  the open border and how to police it .

From The Times

The UK has returned only one asylum seeker to Ireland since a post-Brexit deal was signed in 2020 and the government is now preparing to crack down on the border route being used as a “back door” for illegal immigration after the Belfast attack.

Home Office insiders said the common travel area (CTA) with Ireland was “a massive Achilles’ heel” as concerns rose over illegal migrants taking advantage of the lack of routine immigration checks to enter the UK.

Advertisement

There are 2,370 asylum seekers in supported accommodation in Northern Ireland, 2.5 per cent of all asylum seekers across the UK. 

Jonathan Hall, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said the human rights of asylum seekers were often being prioritised over national security. 

The UK Home Office revealed overnight that in the past year it had apprehended more than 900 “immigration offenders” abusing the open land border.

The Dublin government had a prompt reply

Advertisement

Data from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) in Dublin, however, showed 18,500 people had sought asylum in 2024, of which 90% were thought to have travelled from Great Britain to Ireland via a flight or ferry to Belfast.

Before 2019, the number of people seeking asylum in Ireland was relatively small, about 5,000, commensurate with the experience of a small country on the farthest outreaches of Europe.

That number grew significantly between 2022 and 2024, when it peaked at 18,500. Just 10% of people applied for asylum at an airport or port, while 90% made a first-time application in person at the International Protection Office in Dublin. This figure includes some who may have entered the country legally and days, weeks or months later sought asylum.

In 2025 and 2026 to date, the proportion of asylum seekers applying at the office in person were 88% and 90% respectively.

Advertisement

Without physical checks on the Irish border, neither the UK nor Irish governments can verify the precise numbers of people crossing the border illegally, but in 2024 Ireland’s then justice minister, Helen McEntee, said publicly that 80% were coming over the land border.

Where does that leave us? In NI there are 65,000 “ people of colour”. 124,000 mainly white born outside the UK, mainly from the EU. Irish travellers 2610, Roma 1259.

In the Republic  23.5% foreign born including UK, Asian 3.3%, Black Irish 1.5%. The Republic’s population has expanded dramatically  in line with growing prosperity from 2.8 mn in 1961, to 5.4 mn last year, and projected to rise to 6.7 mn by 2060.

All manageable, surely –   although the new EU-Irish immigration rules llook very complicated and slow  

Advertisement

This  population rise  in the Republic since the WW2  has not  yet kept pace with the rise in Northern Ireland’s population which began with the  introduction  of the Welfare State in 1948, as my namesake Prof Brian Mercer Walker points out slightly mischieviously  in the Irish Times today.

 David Mc Williams described graphically the mass emigration which afflicted the new Irish state in its first 50 years (“Britain was a saviour for Irish migrants. One of those sons will captain England next week,” June 6th). By 1961, an estimated 45 per cent of all those born in Ireland between 1926 and 1936 had left.

It is interesting to note that Northern Ireland in the same period did not face this problem. The government of Northern Ireland can be rightly criticised for not creating an inclusive society or ensuring full civil rights for all.

At the same time, this government pursued policies which brought benefits for every citizen, unionist and nationalist. In their social policies, unionist ministers, especially John M Andrews, insisted with the London treasury that as part of the UK its people were entitled to parity in social services and equal standards with elsewhere in the UK.

Advertisement

Following the Butler Act in Britain, the Education Act (Northern Ireland) 1947, gave free secondary education for all, which was not available in the South until the 1960s. The National Health Service, established in 1949, benefited everyone….

The failings of Northern Ireland in its first 50 years are well known. Its benefits and successes, due to these effective government policies, deserve attention.

Today, the situation is very different. With new Irish government social and economic policies, the southern population has grown remarkably. Still, viewed over the last 100 years, the rate of population growth in the South has yet to catch up with the North. 

  One violent attack  by an immigrant or anybody else is one too many.  Close coordination between the two governments  over policing and data sharing is plainly the right approach. The open  border survived Brexit and will survive race riots. Despite the disaster of Brexit my ideal remains interchangeability  of government arrangements and citizenship in these islands.  On the present situation,  this comment by James Nancy in the Bele Tel deserves an extended extract.

Advertisement

 Violent crimes in Northern Ireland elicit responses so well rehearsed as to have become ritualised: clichéd language running deep and deadening grooves into our collective consciousness.

Every time a woman is murdered in her home — almost always by a white Northern Irish man she knows well — we can set our watches by the expressions of concern that flow from political leaders who then seem to forget about institutionalised misogyny within days.

And so too have racist riots become an annual occurrence in the North, a predictable consequence any time someone of a minority background is accused of a serious crime.

Last year, there were the nights of rioting in Ballymena, which were themselves a sort of horrific reprise of the year before, when minority citizens of Belfast were burned out of their homes and businesses by mobs.

Advertisement

Because of this history, there was a sickening sense of inevitability building through Tuesday as people waited for the calls to go out on social media for protests, for the injunction by politicians to behave “responsibly”, and for the very real safety fears of minority communities to get only a passing mention in a tokenistic, rhetorical gesture towards the notions of basic decency and human empathy.

The political rhetoric surrounding these incidents has become utterly bizarre and full of a confused grammar than betrays both personal and moral cowardice…..

There are reports of “fires targeting homes”, with the sentence structure making it seem as if flames are a sentient body capable of attacking families in their residences. (Perhaps the PPS can launch a case against the tendency of carbon-based substances to burn, or charge the chemical process of change with attempted murder?)

There has too been another round of “legitimate concerns” about immigration raised, which are based on views so comically untrue that no satire of Facebook bigotry could best them.

Advertisement

How many rounds of arson and violence do the minority citizens of Belfast have to live through before the leaders of political unionism learn some reasonable hesitancy and become more concerned with safety than with the prospect of offending far-right activists on social media?

… The key issue is that racist mobs keep trying to murder minorities in our city. The problem is that pogroms have become functionally permitted by our political culture, treated as a seemingly tolerable annual tradition or seasonal occurrence: a sort of perverted Morris dance that leaders are ready to jig along to if it means they can keep making false statements about immigration.

There is much to be done to tackle racism and intercommunal tension in Belfast, but the first and easiest course of action is a change in our leaders’ rhetoric about minorities.

The cost of creating a safer and more tolerant city is no higher than politicians learning to speak responsibly and for them to start treating the safety of minorities with the same care they currently take to avoid offending internet racists.

Advertisement

 

 

 

 

Advertisement

Former BBC journalist and manager in Belfast, Manchester and London, Editor Spolight; Political Editor BBC NI; Current Affairs Commissioning editor BBC Radio 4; Editor Political and Parliamentary Programmes, BBC Westminster; former London Editor Belfast Telegraph. Hon Senior Research Fellow, The Constitution Unit, Univ Coll. London

---

Discover more from Slugger O’Toole

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Source link

Keir Starmer could hardly have been more unequivocal when asked yet again whether he would fight any Labour leadership contest.

“I don’t think it should happen, but if it does then I will fight,” the prime minister said on Friday.

“And let me just be clear with you. That’s not about personal vanity, it’s not about stubbornness. It’s out of a very deep sense of duty.”

Allies of the PM describe him as “frustrated” and “angry” that his future is even up for debate less than two years after leading his party to a landslide election victory.

Advertisement

But whether he likes it or not, it is.

Former health secretary Wes Streeting has already said he will challenge Starmer, while Andy Burnham will also join any contest should he, as expected, win next week’s Makerfield by-election.

James `Lyons, who was director of communications in No.10 until last year, summed up the slightly surreal situation British politics now finds itself in.

“The full weight of the Labour Party’s still very considerable campaign machine is behind Andy Burnham to deliver the result that could end up with the prime minister being ousted,” he told HuffPost UK’s Commons People podcast.

Advertisement

Lyons said Starmer himself “will still think he can turn it round”, but that reality will hit him if Burnham’s victory is confirmed in the early hours of next Friday morning.

“If it looks like Andy’s there, then I think that’s the time to start having some conversations about whether’s it’s in his interests or the country’s interests to have some sort of stable and orderly transition,” he said.

Any lingering chance that Starmer could ride out his latest crisis were killed off by defence secretary John Healey’s excoriating resignation letter on Thursday hitting out at the lack of cash being made available in the government’s Defence Investment Plan.

“The excellent and extensive cross-government work that completed in January – overseen by you, me and the chancellor – confirmed the scale of the challenge and the rising demands on defence,” Healey wrote.

Advertisement

“Since then, you have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.”

Healey’s message was even more impactful given his status as one of the cabinet’s most loyal ministers.

“John is both the most decent and most hardworking person in British politics,” one ally told HuffPost UK.

“People tend to forget that he was a Treasury minister or many years, so really understands what he’s been dealing with.

Advertisement

“His resignation letter was equal parts science, art and moral philosophy. And he will have agonised over every single word and phrasing.”

Healey’s bombshell made it all the more likely that Burnham will quickly become the next prime minister should he see off the challenge from Reform’s UK’s Robert Kenyon in Makerfield.

A Labour source said: “Until John’s resignation, I was imagining a scenario where a more marginal win for Andy might allow an orderly transition over an extended period of time, or even an early Keir v Andy contest leading to the PM hanging on before making a call on his own future in a year’s time.

“But I think John going has made the period ahead much more difficult to predict.”

Advertisement

Sitting outside Burnham’s HQ, the Stubshaw Cross Community and Sports Club, Labour campaign boss Louise Haigh MP insisted they were taking nothing for granted.

She said: “We think it’s going to be close. Reform got 50% of the vote here a month ago, so we’re having to persuade people who voted Reform just a few weeks ago to come over to us, so it’s a really big ask.

“But what is absolutely clear is the Burnham bounce is real and that no other Labour candidate could be in contention.”

The campaign’s efforts in the run-up to polling day will be focused on the 16% of voters who are still undecided. If enough of them break for Burnham, then his path to 10 Downing Street becomes clear.

HuffPost UK has learned that Burnham supporters at Westminster are already gathering nominations for his leadership bid should he win next Thursday.

Advertisement

They hope to collect far more than the 81 required to trigger a contest, thereby creating a sense of unstoppable momentum which they believe would be enough to quickly see him sweep to power.

Lyons, who saw Starmer work up close during his time in No.10, said: “I think there’s every chance that what we will see is a coronation and we will see a significant number of MPs nominating Andy in a way that makes it very difficult for the prime minister to fight on.

“I know in his heart he will want to [fight on], he definitely feels he is the best person to be leading the country during this omni-crisis that has been created by the conflict in the Middle East and the conflict in Europe.

“Under those circumstances, if a sizeable proportion of the parliamentary party don’t want you, I think it’s very hard to carry on.”

Advertisement

Keir Starmer’s belief that he should fight on to save his job is undoubtedly sincere.

But it will soon become apparent that it is a battle he will lose and should therefore be avoided.

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

Source link

Graham Norton has teased what we should expect from his upcoming interview with Madonna.

Earlier this week, it was revealed that Graham was due to chat to the Queen of Pop about her new album Confessions II in a one-on-one special.

On Friday, this was confirmed to be the case, with the BBC announcing that the talk show host already recorded the interview at the London nightclub and performance space KOKO.

The venue holds special significance for Madonna as it was the site of her first ever UK show in 1983, and was also where she delivered a special performance in honour of her Confessions On A Dance Floor album back in 2005.

Advertisement

BBC/So Television/Ricardo Gomes

In an official press release, the BBC said: “The programme sees Graham meet with Madonna for an intimate, in-depth discussion about her incredible life and celebrated career.

“Ahead of the release of her much-anticipated new album Confessions II in July, this rare interview promises to be an unmissable television event.”

“During the interview, Madonna looks back on her early days in New York, reflects on her enduring relationship with the UK, discusses her most recent performance at Coachella, and much more,” the synopsis teased.

“The programme also features special guests, including an appearance from Madonna’s long-time collaborator Stuart Price. Together, they take Graham inside the world of Madonna’s new album, revealing the stories, inspirations, and creative process behind it.”

Advertisement

Graham enthused: “As a lifelong fan it is always a thrill to interview Madonna, but to meet her on the dance floor where she first performed in London over thirty years ago felt incredibly special.

“She remains a legendary pop icon who is still doing what she does best – getting people up to dance!”

Madonna has been a guest on Graham’s show twice before, first in 2012 while promoting her film and W.E., and later in 2019, ahead of the release of her most recent album Madame X.

While Graham has made no secret of the fact he’s a Madonna fan, he also admitted in 2024 that the Like A Prayer singer “doesn’t make it easy” in an interview setting.

Madonna & Graham will be shown on on Friday 26 June at 10.40pm on BBC One, and will also air on BBC Radio 2 on Saturday 4 July, the day after Madonna’s Confessions II album is released.

Advertisement

Source link

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has debunked the right-wing dog whistle suggesting Muslims are claiming benefits for households where a man has multiple wives. Racist British media are beating the same drum to whip-up hatred against Muslims again…

GB News, of course, led the charge, running with the headline “DWP increases benefits paid to husbands with two or more wives.” The rag continued:

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has increased the weekly allowance paid to additional spouses in recognised overseas polygamous marriages as part of this year’s benefits uprating.

From April 2026, each additional spouse in an eligible household now receives £125.25 per week, a 4.8 per cent rise from the previous £119.50 rate.

The uplift adds £5.75 a week, or roughly £299 a year, and mirrors wage growth, which is used to calculate annual Pension Credit increases.

Advertisement

GB News swings at the same racist piñata

While they made it sound like Muslim men are getting special treatment, they’re actually describing increases which anyone on benefits got. The uplift, which happens every April, is just to bring benefits in line with inflation.

So it’s far more likely that your nan, struggling neighbour, and the couple you know who are struggling to make ends meet are getting more money from the taxpayer. As they all should.

GB News was careful not to explicitly blame Muslims, however, they clearly are the target because we don’t have polygamous marriages in the UK. But their target audience are people who think refugees and immigrants come here to live cushy lives and get thousands in benefits. This is despite all the research showing just how much people on Universal Credit struggle to survive.

However, that didn’t stop the Tories’ resident ‘poor people hater’, Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Helen Whately. She continued drumming up hatred. On Instagram Whately said:

Polygamy is illegal here in the UK, but if you’ve married four wives overseas and then moved here you could be claiming up to £78,000 in benefits a year, paid for by the British taxpayer. That is absurd and totally wrong.

She’s correct on one thing, that is ‘absurd and totally wrong’, because it doesn’t happen.

As Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu has pointed out:

In the UK a second, third or fourth wife can’t get a spouse visa if there’s already a legal wife living in the UK. So then how is she going to obtain any welfare benefits as a wife if she can’t get a spouse visa?

The actual number is less than ten.

Mos-Shogbamimu also correctly explained that the tories are vowing to change this if they get into power, but they were already in power for 14 years and didn’t change it. That’s probably because it didn’t happen.

However, as always with right-wing gammons, their argument falls down when they try to prove it.

DWP agrees, the problem doesn’t exist

Tory MP Matt Vickers submitted a series of written questions to the DWP. In them he requested to know more about how many people are claiming benefits in politics. He also wanted to know what the DWP are gonna do about it. The answer is absolutely nothing, because the problem doesn’t exist.

Stephen Timms replied to all of the questions with the same answer:

Polygamous marriages are illegal in the UK. Immigration rules have generally prevented the formation of polygamous households in this country since 1988. Under successive governments access to benefit support for additional spouses is only available where the marriage took place in a country where the practice is legal. The Department does not hold information in respect of Pension Credit.

Timms continued:

However, the most recent published data (August 2025) from the Housing Benefit Single Housing Extract (SHBE) indicates that there are fewer than ten households where claimants are recorded as being in a polygamous marriage formed in another country. In these exceptional cases, there is no financial benefit as more would be paid in benefits if the additional person claimed as a single person. There are no plans to change the existing benefit rules.

Say it louder for those at the back — there are less than 10 claimants who are in a polygamous marriage. This just shows how much the right wing losers are engineering panic about immigration when it’s all absolute lies. The tories know that the quickest way to bring back the gammons from Reform is to be racist.

But like most Tory policies, all they really want to ensure is that the working class attack each other so we don’t look up.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachel Charlton-Dailey

Source link

The first game of the 2026 World Cup, held in Mexico, was notable for reasons other than Donald Trump’s racist authoritarianism. The vomit-inducing bootlicking and double standards of FIFA boss Gianni Infantino didn’t go unnoticed, and Mexican president Claudia Sheinbaum’s refusal to attend made headlines.

Sheinbaum reportedly gave her ticket to a young Indigenous woman and watched Mexico’s victory over South Africa at a sports centre “in the company of the people.”

President Sheinbaum TURNED DOWN her World Cup ticket over the ridiculous prices, choosing to gift it away and watch Mexico's victory with the people at a free local screening instead. pic.twitter.com/dGYqGFtQjI

— Samuel (@resisres) June 11, 2026

Political flashpoints

Beyond the drama of Infantino and Sheinbaum, the tournament quickly became a stage for political flashpoints.

This was a break with the tradition of national heads of state attending opening matches. Moreover, it reflected to some extent the low point the world has reached, amid the US-Israeli genocide in Gaza. It also showed Donald Trump’s flagrant flouting of international law.

FIFA, meanwhile, is perhaps as blatantly awful as it ever has been too. Because it hasn’t just hypocritically refused to ban Israel — despite banning other countries for lesser crimes than genocide. In fact, it has also stooped to the sickening level of sycophancy that Trump craves. For example, it shamefully awarded the warmonger a fake peace prize.

Academic Ricardo Domínguez told El Nuevo Herald that Sheinbaum’s actions were consistent with her government’s slogan “primero los pobres”. It argues that the poorest people should always be the top priority. This was especially relevant as few Mexicans could easily afford the “stratospheric costs” of World Cup tickets.

Sheinbaum also shut the schools in Mexico City for the event. Additionally, she encouraged employers to allow their employees to work remotely.

Mexico’s battle against poverty

Sheinbaum and her predecessor Andrés Manuel López Obrador have overseen a shift away from the capitalist extremism of neoliberalism. Boosting pensions, scholarships, healthcare, wages, workers’ rights, and gender equality, the government has helped. Thus, it has helped to take millions of people out of poverty.

A person earning the minimum wage in Mexico would have needed to work 20 days in order to buy the cheapest ticket for the opening match in Mexico City. And for perspective, a person on minimum wage would have only needed to work for half a day to attend a match at the 1986 World Cup in Mexico.

Mexican teachers, for example, earn on average somewhere between £260 and £650 per month. And many of them have taken advantage of the World Cup events in Mexico to highlight their call for better pay and conditions.

Considering the money the government has invested in World Cup infrastructure, teachers haven’t bought the idea that there’s not enough money to give them proper pay rises. Having protested against low wages and poor working conditions since long before Sheinbaum came to power, they now want her rhetoric to turn into action.

Despite negotiations, Sheinbaum’s government is yet to reach an agreement with the striking teachers.

Sheinbaum has made clear statements of her political focus, like giving away her World Cup ticket and celebrating with ordinary fans. But the struggle to get fairer working conditions from her government absolutely continues.

Featured image via Kevin C. Cox / Getty Images

By The Canary

Source link

Remarkable things have been occurring in the Senedd — as highlighted by independent journalist Will Hayward, 11 Welsh Reform ministers apparently voted to back an amendment criticising their own party.

The original motion under debate was proposed by Dan Thomas, the leader of Reform’s Senedd branch. It called on the Welsh government:

to publish the full costings and timetable for the introduction of their childcare offer within their first 100 days in government.

Plaid Cymru claim that, once implemented, their plan will see every child aged 9 months to 4 years receive 20 hours of fully funded childcare per week, for 48 weeks a year. The party estimates that this will equate to around £30,000 in care costs per child over their first 4 years.

A little amendment…

Now, we should note here that Plaid have stated that their childcare proposal is already fully costed. However, they haven’t shown any inclination to dance to Reform’s tune by publishing it.

Opening the debate, Thomas made a claim that would come back to bite him fairly sharpish:

I know all parties want the best for children and families, and we may have different ideas about how to achieve that, but the substantive motion that we will be voting on is this Government’s full costings and timetable.

I want to reiterate that Reform supports childcare and we support the current childcare offer, which is already baked into the Government’s budget, as introduced by the then Labour Government.

However, Plaid’s Heledd Fychan and Gwyn Williams had another plan. Their amendment proposed that Reform’s entire motion be deleted and replaced with three points:

1. Notes that Reform UK had no commitments on childcare in its Welsh manifesto.

2. Further notes the clear evidence that improving access to childcare would reduce child poverty in Wales, and that access to universal funded childcare would support parents to return to work or to increase their working hours.

Advertisement

3. Recognises the Welsh Government’s commitment to provide an update on the initial costings and phasing for the expansion of universal childcare before the summer recess, in line with the commitments outlined in the First 100 Days plan.

‘Reform has no plans around childcare’

Hayward had a more succinct description here, calling the situation:

a vote to say that Reform has no plans around childcare.

Unsurprisingly, the amendment to embarrass Reform won in short order. 50 Senedd members voted in favour, compared to 41 against.

What was more surprising, however, was that 11 of those 50 votes in favour came from Reform ministers. Given that the far-right party only has 34 members in the entire Senedd, that’s just shy of a third that voted against their own party. What’s more, without their support, the amendment wouldn’t have passed.

Hayward mused that this begs the question “Why did they do this?”:

You could argue that maybe they’re making a bold statement about what they perceive to be a lack of support from their party to parents in Wales when it comes to childcare. Or it could be that they didn’t really understand how to vote or what they were voting on.

Obviously the Canary’s money is on Reform’s Senedd members being utterly clueless. Just look at the party’s extraordinary incompetence on everything from finance to national security (to finance again) to candidate vetting (and to finance again one more time). Hardly screams ‘safe pair of hands’, does it?

An attack on affordable childcare

However, whilst we always enjoy pointing and laughing at Reform cocking up, it’s worth remembering that this party – when it does get itself together enough to vote – is an active danger to us all. Fortunately, the rest of the Senedd weren’t about to forget that fact.

Plaid’s Sarah Rees reiterated that Reform had “not a single proposal” on childcare. However, she also pointed out that even the party’s tenuously related policies would spell doom for many families:

Reform UK’s proposed tax breaks would do nothing to support parents who’ve already been forced out of the workforce because their childcare bills outweigh their earnings. […]

We’ve also heard Reform representatives, including Dan Thomas, speak to the BBC about improving maternity and paternity rights. Yet this sits in direct contradiction to Reform UK’s own policy of scrapping the Equality Act 2010.

However, it was Plaid’s Keira Marshall – herself a new mother – who really called out Reform’s argument for what it is:

In Cardiff, childcare can cost around £85 a day. That’s what I’ve been quoted. That could be around £1,700 some months. No tax cut will solve that. At that price, it would make more sense for my partner to stop working. And unfortunately for the opposition, that sits directly at odds with the rhetoric we’ve heard from their own candidates about women nurturing and men providing. What we’ve heard today is not really a debate about affordability. It’s a debate about whether Reform believe that childcare should exist in a way that allows both parents to work. And on that question, the public is already hearing their answer loud and clear.

Earlier this week, the Canary reported on the fact that Reform leader Nigel Farage has taken over £80,000 from the US anti-abortion lobby. Likewise, four Reform MPs voted against the decriminalisation of abortion.

Of course, immigrant-bashing is very much front and center in Reform’s policies. But make no mistake — this party is an enemy of women’s rights, and those of anyone they perceive as a woman. Whether it’s fighting to make abortion less accessible or attacking affordable childcare, Reform is a poison for the very ideal of equality itself.

Featured image via Jon Rowley / Getty Images

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link