Connect with us
DAPA Banner
DAPA Coin
DAPA
COIN PAYMENT ASSET
PRIVACY · BLOCKDAG · HOMOMORPHIC ENCRYPTION · RUST
ElGamal Encrypted MINE DAPA
🚫 GENESIS SOLD OUT
DAPAPAY COMING

Politics

Politics Home Article | Preventing sight loss: a parliamentary priority

Published

on

Preventing sight loss: a parliamentary priority
Preventing sight loss: a parliamentary priority

More people are living with eye conditions than ever. Ensuring people can access expert treatment quickly isn’t just good healthcare – it’s smart policy

Karen Croker, NHS Relationships and Contracting Director, Newmedica
Karen Croker, NHS Relationships and Contracting Director, Newmedica

What’s the impact on individu­als and their families?

“Sight loss can change everything,” says Karen Croker, NHS Relationships and Contracting Director at Newmedica, a leading provider of NHS ophthalmol­ogy services. “It can mean loss of inde­pendence, difficulty staying in work, and increased isolation.”

What’s the impact on the NHS?

Karen continues: “Ophthalmology is already one of the NHS’ busiest special­ities, accounting for nearly 10 per cent of the entire waiting list. Delays to NHS follow-up care remain a key risk, particu­larly for conditions like glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration (AMD), where regular monitoring is essential to protect sight.

Advertisement

“The impact doesn’t stop there. Sight loss increases the risk of slips and falls. It adds pressure on families, social care and wider NHS services. The challenge is clear – but so is the opportunity to do things differently.”

What about the postcode lottery?

“Access to care still varies depending on where people live,” she explains. “Many MPs and peers will recognise cases where patients can access treatment in one area, but not in a neighbouring one. For patients, this can mean longer waits, fewer options – and avoidable deterioration in their sight. Reducing unwarranted variation is an opportunity to improve outcomes.”

Is this a systemic challenge?

Praising NHS colleagues, Karen adds: “NHS teams work tirelessly for patients every day. But rising demand and demo­graphic change mean the system needs support to keep pace. The solution isn’t one organisation working harder – it’s better collaboration.

Advertisement

“With Parliament, the NHS and inde­pendent providers working together, there is an opportunity to expand capac­ity, improve access and deliver better, more consistent outcomes for patients.”

Is patient choice part of the solution?

“Absolutely,” concludes Karen. “Giving patients a real choice over where they receive secondary eye care helps them access services that meet their needs. It also encourages services to be more responsive, helping the system adapt to demand while maintaining high standards of quality and safety.

“Choice, used well, is a practical lever for improving both experience and outcomes.”

Find out more about Newmedica at www.newmedica.co.uk.

Advertisement

A parliamentary invitation – new report launch

15 July | 2.30pm – 5.30pm | Thames Pavilion, HoC

To support this conversation, you’re invited to the parliamentary launch of a new report commissioned by Newmedica. The report explores how ophthalmology services are commissioned across England –and how those decisions shape patient demand, access, outcomes and waiting times. It highlights the importance of aligning services with real patient need and reducing regional variation.

The event will bring together MPs, peers and clinicians to share practical solutions and discuss what better care could look like in communities such as yours. There’s also a chance to experience a driving simulator, demonstrating vision with and without cataracts – includ­ing a light-hearted hazard perception challenge with a live leaderboard.

To attend, please RSVP to [email protected] or attend on the day with a valid parlia­mentary pass.

Advertisement

To arrange a constituency briefing or visit, contact Newmedica’s Public Affairs & Engagement Team via the same email.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Morning Live’s Helen Skelton Addresses Gethin Jones Dating Rumours

Published

on

Gethin Jones and Helen Skelton leaving the Morning Live studio together in 2023

Helen Skelton is shutting down rumours that she and her Morning Live co-host Gethin Jones are more than just colleagues.

Last year, the BBC pair found themselves at the centre of rumours that they were secretly dating, after it was reported by The Sun they’d been spotted spending time together away from the TV studio.

During a new interview with The Times, the former Strictly Come Dancing star addressed the “wild” speculation head-on.

“We’re not,” she insisted, when asked if she and Gethin were an item. “We work together; he’s one of my best friends.”

Advertisement

Helen also revealed that, despite there being nothing going on between herself and her co-presenter, even some key people in her life have been taken in by the tabloid rumours.

“I’ve had my best friend congratulate me on our engagement,” she noted, before reiterating there’s nothing romantic going on between herself and Gethin.

Gethin Jones and Helen Skelton leaving the Morning Live studio together in 2023
Gethin Jones and Helen Skelton leaving the Morning Live studio together in 2023

Earlier this year, Helen told The Mirror: “[Gethin and I] just work together, we are not together. No, no, no. We are just work friends.

“They printed pictures of us at work and [claimed] that we’re together [but we were] at work together.”

Gethin previously told The Sun: “We are very supportive of each other, we like to look out for each other. I think that’s fair to say on and off camera.

Advertisement

“You sometimes could get… you might need a little pep talk every now and then. Because she’s very passionate.”

Helen was previously married to former rugby pro Richie Myler, with whom she shares three children, for nine years.

In April 2022, the Countryfile host announced that she and Richie had parted ways, telling her Instagram followers at the time: “Very sad to say that Richie and I are no longer a couple. He has left the family home. We will be doing our best to co-parent our small children.”

Helen later wrote in her memoir that the break-up had come as a huge “shock”, claiming: “I know that following break-ups, people often say they didn’t see it coming and it sounds like a cliché, but that was me.”

Advertisement

Months after the split, Helen confirmed she was set to take part in Strictly Come Dancing, telling HuffPost UK at the time she’d signed up for the show to bring some “joy” and “fun” back into her life.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

The Ring And Lilo & Stitch Actor Daveigh Chase’s Cause Of Death Was AIDS

Published

on

Daveigh Chase as Samara in the 2002 film The Ring

Former child actor Daveigh Chase died as a result of AIDS, the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner has said.

Daveigh was best known for her voice work in projects like Disney’s Lilo & Stitch and the English dub of Studio Ghibli’s Spirited Away, as well as on-screen performances in the horror film The Ring and the psychological thriller Donnie Darko.

Earlier this month, it was confirmed that she had died at the age of 35, with AIDS having been named as her cause of death this week.

The coroner also listed “chronic polysubstance use” – the use of multiple drugs – as an “other significant condition” that contributed to Daveigh’s death.

Advertisement
Daveigh Chase as Samara in the 2002 film The Ring
Daveigh Chase as Samara in the 2002 film The Ring

Merrick Morton/Dreamworks Llc/Macdonald/Parkes Prods/Kobal/Shutterstock

It had previously been reported that Daveigh had died as a result of complications from bacterial meningitis and sepsis.

Daveigh’s father told NBC News that Daveigh, who retired from acting just over a decade ago, had been homeless and living near the Los Angeles hospital where she was admitted and later died.

He claimed she had also been suffering from severe malnutrition when she was admitted to hospital.

In a statement to BBC News shortly after her death, the late actor’s manager remembered Daveigh as “the greatest”.

Advertisement

“She was not very Hollywood,” he recalled. “She’d rather eat at Bob’s Big Boy and go home with the cats. She loved acting but wasn’t into the fame scene.”

Daveigh’s career began with a string of roles in shows like Sabrina The Teenage Witch, Charmed and ER in her younger years, before she was cast as Jake Gyllenhaal’s on-screen sister in Donnie Darko. Her character subsequently landed her own straight-to-video spin-off sequel, titled S Darko.

She also played Samara in The Ring, reprising the role in a 2005 sequel, The Ring and later portrayed Rhonda Volmer in the US drama Big Love, sharing the screen with the likes of Bill Paxton, Chloë Sevigny and Amanda Seyfried.

Her final on-screen work was in the indie horror Jack Goes Home and the thriller American Romance, after which she took a step back from her acting career.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

UK Defence Spending Insufficient Former Army Chief Warns

Published

on

UK Defence Spending Insufficient Former Army Chief Warns

The government’s long-delayed blueprint for how it will fund Britain’s armed forces is not enough to keep the country safe, according to a former army chief.

Keir Starmer will unveil the Defence Investment Plan (DIP) on Tuesday in one of his last major acts before he resigns as prime minister.

It is expected to contain an extra £15 billion for the armed forces over the next four years – £1.5bn more than former defence secretary John Healey was given before he dramatically resigned earlier this month.

But it is well short of the £28bn defence chiefs say is needed.

Advertisement

Crucially, the DIP will also not say how the UK plans to spend 3% of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence by 2030, or hit Nato’s target of 3.5% by 2035.

General Sir Richard Barrons, who last year co-authored the government’s Strategic Defence Review, told Radio 4′s Today programme that ministers urgently needed to find more cash.

The former Commander of Joint Forces Command said: “In oder to defend the UK sufficiently well, sufficiently quickly, more has to be done sooner and that requires more money than is currently on the table.

“If the demand was for £28bn over the first four years and the settlement might be around £15bn over four years, that means either some things are not going to be bought or will be delayed, and it will mean that some forms of activity like training and infrastructure maintenance and logistics, things that cost real cash, will be done less well or perhaps not even done at all.”

Advertisement

He added: “The good news is that today’s British armed forces know perfectly well what they have to do, they understand this transformation, and all three services have really very good models for what they need to do.

“Their challenge is that in order to do it well enough and fast enough, they’ll need more money sooner.

“And what they’re going to see in the DIP today is a struggle, not just for the first four years, but until the government can articulate how the UK gets to spend 3.5% of GDP … by 2035.

“Until that trajectory is clear we don’t have a four-year slowdown, we have a 10-year slowdown.”

Advertisement

Barrons said the UK was also lagging well behind other European countries.

“If you look at most of our European allies in Nato, they are spending more money much faster on revitalising and beginning to transform their armed forces, and they’re looking at the UK, who were once an exemplar of a European nation in Nato, and we’re now about halfway down the spending table in Nato.”

He added: “We’re not keeping up with our allies, we’re certainly not keeping up with our enemies, and we know that the US is not going to come and save European security in the face of a Russian threat.

“So until we come to terms with the fact that we have to find more money for defence, and yes it will be at the expense of other things we like more, we are simply not going to be ready to defend this country properly.”

Advertisement

But speaking ahead of the DIP’s publication, Starmer said: “This game-changing investment will strengthen our armed forces on land, at sea and in the air, ensuring our servicemen and women have the cutting-edge capabilities they need to deter evolving threats and keep the British people safe.

“At the same time, we are backing British innovation, British industry and British jobs and delivering opportunity to every corner of the country.

“Today’s defence investment plan will help drive growth across the UK, giving our industrial base the confidence, certainty and support it needs to develop and scale the technologies that will keep our country safe and secure long into the future.”

Listen 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.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

A Clue To Dementia Could Show Up As Early As 45

Published

on

A Clue To Dementia Could Show Up As Early As 45

One in 11 people aged 65 and over have dementia in the UK, the NHS said. And according to Alzheimer’s Society, a person’s risk “roughly doubles” every five years after around 70.

But while it might take decades for symptoms to show, researchers increasingly think markers of coming dementia can begin years before diagnosis.

And a recent paper in Springer Nature has suggested that a biomarker in people’s blood – pTau181, which is linked to a higher dementia risk – might hint at a greater likelihood of developing the condition when seen in 45-year-olds.

“Although plasma pTau181 has been shown to accurately discriminate patients with Alzheimer’s disease from healthy older adults, there are few studies of plasma biomarkers among middle-aged populations,” the paper reads.

Advertisement

People with higher levels of the blood marker were likelier to self-report cognitive concerns

45-year-olds with elevated pTau181 were more likely to say they had concerns about their cognition than adults of the same age with lower pTau181 levels in this study.

They tended to be more worried about their memory and thinking, though this didn’t show up on cognitive scores.

Researchers call this phenomenon – the “self-reported persistent decline in cognitive performance with normal performance on objective cognitive tests, in the absence of another explanation” – subjective cognitive decline (SCD).

Advertisement

Scans and other investigations didn’t show any structural brain changes, usually linked to dementia, among those with more pTau181.

Speaking to the University of Otago, the study’s lead author, Dr Ashleigh Barrett-Young, said that this might mean signs of higher dementia risk begin years before the changes we associate with the condition start.

“This means there may be an important window for prevention, which remains one of the most promising approaches for Alzheimer’s disease,” she said.

Dr Barrett-Young added that their results might mean small changes in cognition –SCD – combined with elevated pTau181 aged 45 could hint at measurable issues later on.

Advertisement

“This highlights the need for careful research to understand how early changes relate to later outcomes.”

That doesn’t mean elevated pTau181 levels definitely mean you’ll get dementia

Dr Barrett-Young stressed that this theory needs more research.

She said “Understanding the earliest stages of disease development is essential for designing effective prevention and treatment strategies, even if clinical tools are still some way off.

Advertisement

“Importantly, biomarkers like pTau181 reflect risk, not certainty”.

We don’t know for sure whether those with a combination of higher pTau181 and SCD aged 45 will definitely face a higher dementia risk, either.

Writing for The Conversation, Dr Barrett-Young said: “Perhaps pTau181 increases during the earliest stages of Alzheimer’s disease, when people first start to notice their memory worsening, but no changes are shown yet in MRI scans.

“Or it could be that elevated pTau181 is not related to Alzheimer’s disease risk in midlife, and the protein is only useful for detecting Alzheimer’s in older adults. We don’t know enough yet, but will be following the same group of people as they get older to continue this research.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Putin Mocked After 15 Failed Attempts To Seize Particular Ukrainian Region

Published

on

Putin Mocked After 15 Failed Attempts To Seize Particular Ukrainian Region

Vladimir Putin has been mocked after trying and failing to fully seize Ukraine’s Donbas region “15 times”.

The Donbas, made up of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts to the east of Ukraine, has been mostly under Russian occupation since Putin launched his illegal invasion in 2022.

But the Kremlin has struggled to establish full control over the last 10% of the region – despite repeated attempts.

It comes as Putin’s grip on power is said to be weakening, especially as long-range drone strikes from Ukraine rock the everyday lives of the general Russian public.

Advertisement

His Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, was quick to call attention to Putin’s failures on Monday.

“Since the start of the full-scale war, the Russian army has been given as many as 15 deadlines for capturing our Donetsk region,” Zelenskyy said in his nightly online address.

“Russia’s political leadership remains obsessed with Donbas. They have entertained this delusion – that they would fully capture Donbas – 15 times already.”

He claimed Putin has set multiple deadlines for his troops to capture the region but instead has endured more than 1.5 million casualties.

Advertisement

“In 2022, the deadlines were 31 March, then 9 May, 1 June, 15 September, and 31 December,” the Ukrainian president said.

“In 2023, Putin set two more deadlines for capturing Donbas: 1 March, and then, when that failed again, they moved it to 31 December. In 2024, there were again two such deadlines.”

Zelenskyy claimed Putin wanted to show US president Donald Trump – who has been trying, unsuccessfully, to end the conflict – that Ukraine would “supposedly fall”.

But he continued: “If Russia does not end its war, they will have to move this deadline again as well.

Advertisement

“If Putin wants to sacrifice another million of his soldiers to keep smashing against this wall, then the million Russians who have not yet been mobilised into the Russian army and are arguing in gas lines should think about what awaits them next.”

Away from the Donbas, Russia has captured all of the Luhansk region and a large proportion of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Together with the Crimea peninsula, which has been occupied since 2014, Putin holds around a fifth of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.

But Ukraine seems to hold the cards on the warfront at the moment.

Advertisement

Even Trump, typically sympathetic to Russia, has acknowledged: “Zelenskyy is doing pretty well. No matter how you look at it, he’s holding his own at least.”

Listen 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

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Under-55s Are Biologically Ageing More Quickly

Published

on

Under-55s Are Biologically Ageing More Quickly

You might think that lifespans are getting longer and longer, but some experts think they’ve peaked. (In fact, UK life expectancies have dipped since the pandemic.)

And according to a new paper published in Nature Ageing, people born between 1950 and 1954 are experiencing slower biological ageing than later generations.

Speaking to Oncology Central, assistant porfessor Yin Cao, who co-authored the study, said: “Biological ageing isn’t just about the number of birthdays you’ve had — it reflects wear and tear happening inside the body at a cellular and molecular level. This can include changes that affect how cells and tissues function, such as chronic inflammation, weakening of the immune system and damage building up in cells over time.

“Our findings suggest that some younger adults may be experiencing these biological changes earlier than expected, and that this could be linked to the rising rates of cancers seen in younger generations.”

Advertisement

It comes after the BMJ Oncology found a “global surge in cancers among the under 50s over past three decades”.

This paper found that the bigger the gap between someone’s chronological age (years) and biological age, the higher the cancer risk.

What might that mean?

This research used data from the UK Biobank, a long-standing project in which almost half a million participants have agreed to make their health data available to researchers, and the US’ National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) All of Us Research Program.

Advertisement

It involved information from over 154,000 UK young adults and more than 10,000 US participants.

Researchers worked out people’s biological age according to their systemic (whole-body) and organ-specific aging. They did this by looking at things like blood biochemistry markers and the levels of different kinds of proteins linked to certain organs.

Then, they compared participants’ biological ages to their chronological ones.

They found that people from the UK between 1965 and 1974 “had systemic aging that was 23% of one standard deviation higher compared with those born between 1950 and 1954”.

Advertisement

And those born between 1990 and 1999 “had systemic aging that was 92% of one standard deviation higher compared with those born between 1965 and 1969”.

Basically, that means older people’s biological ages seem closer to their chronological age.

That may matter because in this study, the faster biological ageing seen among younger groups was linked to 8% increased risk of early-onset cancers, particularly lung, gastrointestinal and uterine cancers.

And those with the most advanced biological ageing had a 15% higher risk compared to those with the least cellular wear and tear.

Advertisement

Researchers hope they can help spot cancers earlier

“If we can identify younger people with the highest cancer risk when they are still healthy, we can focus on prevention and early-detection strategies for the individuals who will benefit most from early interventions”, Cao told The University of Washington’s WashU Medicine.

Dr David Scott, director of Cancer Grand Challenges – which was involved with the research – added, “Right now, we don’t have a definitive answer to what’s driving the rise of early-onset cancers around the world, but studies like this are helping us piece together the bigger picture, showing that cancer may be influenced not just by changes inside individual cells, but by wider changes happening across the body as a whole.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

The House | The social media ban for under-16s is a sticking plaster, not a solution to online harms

Published

on

The social media ban for under-16s is a sticking plaster, not a solution to online harms
The social media ban for under-16s is a sticking plaster, not a solution to online harms

(PA Images/Alamy)


3 min read

Our children are exposed to serious harms online, driven in large part by social media companies looking to maximise their profits.

Advertisement

This status quo isn’t acceptable, and my committee has repeatedly called for stronger action to protect UK users, particularly children. I was glad to see Keir Starmer’s government finally taking long overdue steps to tackle the risks children face online, after successive governments have failed to act.

However, a ban on under 16-year-olds using social media won’t be enough to protect them from the spiralling spread of misinformation and other harmful content on our screens.

Part of this has to do with the fact a ban would be difficult to enforce and easily circumnavigated. Evidence from a similar ban in Australia shows that young people can and do use workarounds such as VPNs. New platforms and services will likely emerge to fill gaps left by restrictions, while generative AI tools and messaging apps like WhatsApp fall outside the scope of the ban.

Advertisement

More fundamentally, this approach treats the symptoms rather than the cause. Restricting access for some users won’t fix a flawed and dangerous product – it’s not enough to simply block some people from using social media. Instead, wider steps are needed to make it safer for everyone. Unless the government tackles the drivers behind the viral online spread of harmful content, any ban will amount to little more than a sticking plaster.

At the heart of the problem is the algorithmic amplification of harmful content. Social media recommender algorithms promote highly engaging material, regardless of its accuracy or safety. The business models of social media companies incentivise and encourage as much engagement as possible, even when this is driven by misleading or dangerous content.

In 2025, my committee warned that the Online Safety Act wasn’t up to scratch because it didn’t protect users from this core issue around algorithmic amplification. We set out clear, practical recommendations to strengthen the online safety regime – most of which were rejected by the government. A year on, it’s clear that the situation isn’t improving. Recent violence and unrest, including events in Belfast, show the real-world consequences of unchecked false and harmful content online.

Advertisement

If the government is serious about protecting children from online harms, it must take decisive action now and revisit my committee’s recommendations.

At present, the government is operating without comprehensive and accurate information about how social media recommender algorithms work

Social media companies should be held accountable for the viral spread of harmful content on their platforms. There must be clear duties in place to ensure they deprioritise content which fact-checkers have found to be false. There should also be tougher regulation to combat the underlying business models that incentivise the viral spread of legal but harmful content.

Advertisement

At present, the government is operating without comprehensive and accurate information about how social media recommender algorithms work. A lack of transparency from companies has meant we don’t have the data we need to fully understand and address the problem. It’s essential that the government commissions independent research into this, without which it will be difficult to develop effective regulation.

Finally, regulating technology alone is not sufficient. Our online safety regime should be grounded in clear principles like freedom of expression and transparency, which will remain sound in the face of future technological developments.

Starmer’s government was right to act, but a ban alone won’t resolve the deeper issues at play. To truly make the online world safer for our children, and for society as a whole, we must confront the root causes of online harms – not just limit access to them. 

Chi Onwurah is Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central & West, and chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Select Committee

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Politics Home Article | From the front line to the future force

Published

on

From the front line to the future force
From the front line to the future force

Charlie Lockyear during deployment. Faces have been blurred for anonymity

Charlie Lockyear, Business Development Director – Defence



Charlie Lockyear, Business Development Director – Defence
| Serco

Advertisement

As defence technology reshapes modern warfare, success will rely on a defence enterprise able to integrate it quickly, build the right skills and deliver capability at pace

Armed Forces Day is, above all, a chance to recog­nise the people who serve and those who have served. For me, it is a moment to reflect on the commitment, resilience, sense of duty and sacri­fice that come with military life. After six tours of Afghanistan, I know how much that experience can shape you. Long after you leave, it stays with you in how you think, how you work and how you see the world.

Advertisement

Leaving the armed forces is a big change. You step away from a role, a rhythm and a community that have shaped who you are, but you carry a huge amount with you. Service leaves you with skills and instincts that stay valuable wherever you go – resilience, teamwork, leadership, and the ability to stay calm and focused when things get tough. The key is finding somewhere to move onto where those qualities still drive purpose.

I have found that at Serco. My experience in service shapes how I approach my work every day and the contribution I make to Serco’s defence business. Having deployed on oper­ations, I understand what matters when it comes to keeping our service men and women safe. But the way we can do that, and the way that we fight is changing rapidly.

I spent my career flying helicopters, and while they’ll always have a place in protecting the nation and people who serve, there are new ways to increase our mass and capability. Autonomous systems, drones and software-led capability are no longer on the margins – they are now central to the future of modern warfare. These systems will play a key role in removing service men and women from the firing line, but they still rely on the defence enterprise deploying the right skills, in the right place at the right time to use them effectively.

Advertisement

That fundamentally changes what you need from the work­force. It is not about replacing people, but about evolving the roles around them: remote operators, cyber specialists and engineers who can bring together complex, tech-enabled systems and make decisions quickly.

For me, that is one of the most exciting parts of working in defence today. Autonomy has moved beyond experimentation and into real-world adoption, creating new opportunities to build capability differently. The challenge now is integrating it at pace and making it usable in prac­tice. The 55m-long uncrewed surface vessel, Defiant USX-1, designed and developed by Serco for DARPA in the US, is conducting extended autonomous operations at sea, demonstrating how rapidly maritime autonomy is moving into real-world use. That, in turn, means rethinking procure­ment, regulation, training and the skills we need across the defence workforce.

It is also about valuing the experience of those who have served while helping shape what comes next. Armed Forces Day is about recognition, but it is also about looking ahead. I think those of us with lived experience of service have an important part to play in making sure the future of defence is strong, practical and ready for what is coming.

Click here to find out more about how Serco is equipping our armed forces with capabilities of the future.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Workers must defend their right to private opinions

Published

on

Workers must defend their right to private opinions

Britain is stumbling into a free-speech disaster. Three months ago, the Adam Smith Institute gatecrashed the news with a carefully-drafted Free Speech Bill which would have put into our law something like the American First Amendment, aimed at stopping the government limiting your right to speak your mind except in very limited cases. No political party has taken this up yet, but there is hope – are you listening, Kemi and Nigel, since you could be on to a winner?

The problem hasn’t gone away. Last week, an important private members’ bill on a related subject slid quietly into the House of Lords, courtesy of Tory peer Lord Moynihan. The Regulated Professions (Freedom of Speech) Bill aims to protect professionals from attempts by any professional regulator to penalise them for ‘off-duty expressive conduct’ – that is, anything they say outside the actual practice of their profession.

The bill is uncompromising. The only exceptions to protected speech are threats of violence, threats of harm relating to professional duties, serious sexual offences or actual conviction for an offence which directly affects the ability to practise the profession, or carries imprisonment. That’s it. Offensiveness, inconsistency with policies of a professional governing body, and allegedly bringing a profession into disrepute are specifically made inadmissible grounds. Where protections apply, regulators are barred from imposing penalties, disadvantages, compulsory training, or any other coercive measures.

Advertisement

This matters big-time. It’s all very well to say that the general law allows you to speak your mind, but that doesn’t mean very much if an employer can sack you for expressing a view they happen to disagree with. And it’s easy to forget that it isn’t a matter of just a few people. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, financial professionals, architects, chartered surveyors, chemists, physiotherapists, nurses, teachers, social workers – the list of those who have to watch carefully what they say because the regulator might come down on them if they step out of line is a long one.

Furthermore, regulators can use these powers fairly drastically. Alleged Islamophobia, racism and sexism expressed online, or simply matters seen as offensive or contrary to a profession’s ‘values’, are common grounds for people being hit with severe professional penalties or being drummed out entirely. The basis varies, but it’s often a fairly open-ended rule that they must not bring their profession into disrepute, or affect the respect the public has for members of it.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Please wait…

Advertisement
Advertisement

This should worry us. It is obviously bad for the professionals themselves. With professional sanctions, it’s not merely a matter of losing a job, but livelihood: even if you find someone somewhere else who knows your views and is happy to give you a job, they’re not allowed to employ you.

Take the Manchester teacher who, in a series of social media posts in 2023 and 2024, suggested using the Royal Navy to prevent illegal immigration. ‘Just get rid of the lot of them, if they hate this country so much they should fuck off’, he said in a separate post. This is a perfectly lawful view to hold. Yet three months ago, he was barred from every classroom in the country, for the rest of his life.

Advertisement

It’s also bad for the professions. It is perverse to assume that respect for a profession increases in proportion to its suppression of opinions that the great and the good don’t like. The inexorable effect of the present regime is that with the legally backed weeding out of the shocking, the eccentric and the maverick, we will end up with monochrome, boring people whose chief skill is not offending anyone.

That’s why we need to support Lord Moynihan’s bill. Unlike many private members’ bills, it is principled, well-drafted, and entirely practical. Indeed, there is history behind it. Three years ago, lawyers in the socially conservative Canadian province of Alberta objected to their regulator’s imposition of compulsory training in so-called indigenous cultural competency. Sensing the public mood, the provincial parliament last December passed the Regulated Professions Neutrality Act. The terms of this entirely wholesome law, which seems to have been successful, inspired the present bill – in many cases, its wording is the same.

As a private member’s bill, we have to admit that the chances of it getting anywhere are almost nil. Not only would it need either overwhelming support from peers or government support (which it doesn’t have), the Blob and its Labour allies will see it as poisonous.

Advertisement

But that’s not the point. The more people know about it, and the more publicity it gets, the bigger the marker it will put down. Brexit and scepticism over international law were once supposedly cranks’ ideas, but one is now reality and the other official policy of two opposition parties, the Conservatives and Reform UK. It’s time we did the same for a muscular approach to the right of free speech. The Regulated Professions (Freedom of Speech) Bill is an ideal start. The more noise people make about it now, the better.

Andrew Tettenborn is a professor of commercial law and a former Cambridge admissions officer.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Britain’s heatwave response was straight from the Covid playbook

Published

on

Britain’s heatwave response was straight from the Covid playbook

Hundreds of school closures across England and Wales, train companies advising people not to travel, and businesses encouraging staff to work from home. Remind you of anything? It’s the Covid playbook, which is rapidly becoming the ‘new normal’ for how our supposedly advanced society responds to an unusual and difficult event. And given that in seasonal Britain, the weather can often be unpredictable and aggravating, the playbook now has plenty of opportunities for an airing.

The Covid playbook is not about taking sensible precautions to deal with challenging situations. Very hot weather, like that we experienced last week, is uncomfortable for many and dangerous for some. We might need to adapt some of our daily practices, and some infrastructure will struggle to cope. All this has happened in heatwaves past, too.

But since Covid, the response to both hot and cold weather – like the response to the occasional outbreaks of infectious disease – has followed a predictable formula. That is, a problem is quickly turned into a drama with dire warnings of a crisis. This is far worse for our collective health than a few days of intense sunshine.

Advertisement

The first step in the playbook is to exaggerate what’s new. With Covid, the clear danger posed by the emergence of a novel and highly infectious coronavirus was quickly escalated into the idea that a respiratory infection pandemic was itself ‘unprecedented’: something that made little sense, given the continual comparisons with the ‘Spanish flu’ pandemic of 1918-20. But because the Covid pandemic was seen to be unprecedented, this apparently justified the implementation of extraordinary and untested containment methods, from population-wide lockdowns to business closures and bizarre social-distancing rules and paraphernalia. The authorities didn’t draw on historical experience but on present-day panic. Those in power presumed that our society could not cope with this challenge, so we had better stop functioning as a society and send everyone home.

In the present heatwave, we’ve heard a lot about the Met Office issuing a rare ‘extreme heat warning’, and we’ve been treated to daily graphics of the regions under a red or amber blob. What we hear less is that extreme heat warnings were only introduced in the UK in July 2021, and one was issued as recently as 2022. We also find ourselves beset by severe weather warnings during the winter months, accompanied by the same demands: work from home, don’t travel, close the schools. This is another feature of the Covid playbook – the invention of a new metric designed to frame the current problem as more severe than anything that has happened to date.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Please wait…

Advertisement
Advertisement

The problem is not necessarily that these metrics are false – UK summer temperatures may well be higher than in the past, and Covid was very infectious. It’s that these techniques are used to simplify a complex situation and to promote measures that are fundamentally anti-social. Take the closure of schools and advice to stay at home and avoid travelling. Each of these decisions can make pragmatic sense on their own terms. We know that sweaty kids in overheated classrooms are unlikely to learn a great deal, and that it’s a bad time to be stuck in a traffic jam on the M1. But since Covid, the implementation of such measures has become uniform and routine, with little consideration of the knock-on effects for certain sections of society and for social life as a whole.

As we know from the pandemic, working and studying from home might be fine for those with particular jobs and nice airy houses – not so much for families crammed into stuffy city apartments with limited technology. The debate about whether WFH is good or bad for productivity is ongoing, but most of us know that in Britain today, very little seems to be getting done at the best of times. Whenever we have some adverse weather, we immediately enter a doom loop – employees are either encouraged to WFH or they demand the right to WFH, and even those who want to come into work may find themselves prevented from doing so because their kid’s school might close or the transport might break down. Air-conditioned trains, offices and cafes find themselves half empty, while families swelter in their over-insulated homes driving each other insane. Make it make sense!

Advertisement

There are some exceptions to this anti-social approach. In London, a ‘cool map’ has been produced to inform people about public spaces with shade and air-con. In Paris, as the authorities are trying to cope by banning alcohol in public places, residents are taking matters into their own hands by jumping into the canal. Still, it’s striking how these practical social measures for dealing with a heatwave have come to seem like a deviant afterthought, as if what people really should be doing is sweating it out alone, glued to their phones for news about when it all might end.

Predictably, the media has made itself into the story here. Rather than simply report on the facts about the weather and official advice that might be given, media outlets – particularly those ‘trusted’ sources such as the BBC, to which Keir Starmer wants to give an algorithmic boost to counter ‘disinformation’ – immediately create a cycle of competitive escalation. Right from the get-go, a suggestion of adverse weather leads to breathless reporting about what’s been closed, who’s died, who’s struggling to cope, where there’s a shortage of water, where public transport has gone down. And it’s all interspersed with inane bits of advice about ‘how to protect yourself’ and smug mini-commentaries about climate change.

All this contributes to the anti-social effect. Who, reading about disaster everywhere all at once, is inclined to schlep to the office or force their kids into school? It’s utterly sensationalist and irresponsible, and surely makes people feel worse than they would if they were just left to get on with working out how best to cool down and keep going with their lives.

Advertisement

For all the excitable protestations about unprecedented events, the Covid playbook is a response to a more mundane and depressing trend. While ordinary people are not trusted to make sensible decisions about their own health and wellbeing, social institutions and public infrastructure casually withdraw from their collective responsibilities.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025