If Britain really has “run out of money” – as both Labour and the Conservatives keep childishly claiming – why are neither party actually proposing any ways to raise more money?
Stay in touch!
Sign up to be updated with Evolve’s latest stories, and for opportunities to get involved.
Advertisement
It seems a little strange, doesn’t it!
I mean, both are essentially saying “let’s continue doing exactly the same things that got us into this mess in the first place and hope everything somehow gets better on its own“!
It’s literally the definition of insanity.
However, there’s one surefire way of raising a bit more money that neither politicians or the media talking about: increasing taxes.
Advertisement
But we’re not talking about raising taxes on ordinary people (in fact, I think we should lower taxes on ordinary people considerably).
No. We’re talking about something the billionaire-controlled media, and the entire political class, fiercely avoids mentioning: raising taxes on the very richest (and making damn sure they can’t just avoid them)!
However, it’s not just the media and politicans who consistently reject the idea. Many ordinary people – even though they’re definitely not rich themselves – constantly argue against raising taxes on the rich as well.
“If we raise taxes on the rich, they’ll simply just leave the country or they’ll just find some way to avoid paying it – and anyway, rich people work hard and create jobs, so they deserve low taxes anyway” they claim.
Advertisement
However, every single one of these arguments is complete and utter horse shit, concocted by some Billionaire-backed thinktank, Trust Fund baby “journalist”, or private-schooled posho politician, purely so them and their wealthy chums can simply continue to hoard increasingly massive stacks of cash and assets without paying a penny more in tax.
And yet, for the last half decade, ordinary people have been constantly falling for these completely bogus arguments – totally against their own interests.
So here’s how the hell it happened – and here’s how we can actually start to improve our country again.
50 Years of Tax Cuts for The Rich and Tax Rises for The Poor
First, a little bit of history.
Advertisement
Many people aren’t aware of it, but for the last 50 years or so, successive governments have constantly lowered taxes purely for the very richest people in our society.
And, whilst doing so, numerous progressive wealth taxes have also been scrapped and replaced by regressive taxes which hit ordinary people far harder than those at the top.
And then there are the mountains of tax loopholes that have been intentionally baked into the system, which only the very richest with their fancy pants accountants and high price lawyers can afford to take advantage of.
And, if you don’t believe me, here are the facts:
Advertisement
In 1972, the Purchase Tax – a progressive tax on luxury goods which stood at 33% – was abolished. It was replaced by VAT, a regressive tax levied on almost all goods which hits the poorest the hardest. VAT has gradually been raised from 10% on its introduction, to 20% presently.
In 1975, Estate Duty was abolished. It taxed the transfer of estates worth over £5.5m (adjusted for inflation) at 85%. Thatcher replaced Estate Duty with Inheritance Tax, which currently taxes estates worth over £325,000 at a flat rate of 40%. However, there are numerous huge loopholes built into the tax; loopholes which Margaret Thatcher’s children used to avoid paying around £1m in Inheritance Tax on the estate she left to them because the property was registered in an offshore trust. In addition, research shows that the super-rich pay an average rate of just 10% in Inheritance Tax – saving them countless billions each year – whilst ordinary families inheriting average sized estates pay far more.
In 1979, the top rate of income tax was 83%. By 1988, Margeret Thatcher had more than halved it to 40%. It currently stands at 45%
In 1979, Corporation Tax was 52%. It has been systematically reduced over the last 40 years, and now stands at just 25%
In 1984, Thatcher abolished the Surtax – an extra tax levied at 15% for unearned income such as interest from investments, dividends from shareholdings, or rent from investment properties
In 1990, Thatcher introduced the widely-hated Poll Tax – a regressive flat rate charge on every adult in the country regardless of income. This was replaced by Council Tax in 1993 – a system which is almost as regressive as the Poll Tax, and which still hits lower earners far harder than the rich
(This is by no means a definitive list – and if you have any more examples, please leave them in the comments!)
These tax changes were purposefully designed to shift a large proportion of the tax burden from the very richest onto the rest of us instead – and it worked.
Indeed, from the late 1970s until the present day, the richest 10% of Brits have steadily increased their share of the UK’s wealth, whilst the wealth of the bottom 50% has fallen.
After WWII, high taxes specifically on the super-rich helped to fund the creation of the the NHS, the Welfare State and other progressive public policies, helping to dramatically improve ordinary people’s incomes, reduce inequality, and significantly improve the state of the country (which is why this period is widely know as the ‘post-war boom’).
However, as demonstrated by the graph below, since the late 1970s and the introduction of so-called Trickle Down Economics (or Neoliberalism), the rich have slowly been clawing this lost wealth back, and income equality has become just as bad as it was prior to WWII again.
Advertisement
Tax (The Rich) Avoidance
So, as I’m sure you’ll now agree, the facts are crystal clear: cutting taxes for the rich only benefits the rich.
Yet, despite the state of the UK declining horrendously over the last decade or so, barely anybody is talking about reversing the trend which is quite clearly causing it – especially not the mainstream media.
So why is nobody talking about taxing the rich again?
Well it’s quite simple. The vast majority of our political institutions – including the mainstream media and both main political parties – have been captured by the super-rich and their outriders.
Advertisement
These institutions are simply used as vehicles to further their own interests – and these interests quite obviously include, among other things, keeping their own taxes as low as possible!
Who controls the UK media?
Who controls the UK’s main political parties?
The Conservative Party has been the political vehicle of the rich and powerful since it was formed – as I have previously written about extensively here.
Advertisement
Its donors include a who’s who of billionaires, oligarchs, hedge fund managers, property developers and other extremely wealthy individuals and organisations.
It’s obviously not a coincedence that Tory policies just happene to benefit these people, and that they also often benefit from crony contracts and lifetime peerages – just a few of the numerous examples of legalised corruption that plague our political system.
However, when it comes to the Labour Party – which was created as the political vehicle of the working class, and whose funding comes from a mixture of Trade Unions and private donors – things are a little more complicated.
As you’ve probably heard before, the Labour Party has always been a so-called “broad church” o left-wingers. However, since the 1990s, the party has become increasingly dominated by a right-wing faction funded by vested interests and closely aligned with the interests of the Establishment.
Advertisement
When a Labour leader is elected who doesn’t adequately serve the interests of the Estalishment, they are systematically attacked both internally by careerist MPs who align with the rich and powerful, and externally by the billionaire-controlled media and their outriders – something we saw with both Ed Miliband from 2010-15 and, to a far greater extent, Jeremy Corbyn from 2015-19.
And now, the current Labour leader Keir Starmer is following this exact playbook: steadfastly refusing to do literally anything which could in any way contradict the interests of the Establishment, and completely reversing on his previous redistributive pledges in an attempt to reassure the rich and powerful that he is not a threat.
Class Interest
With control of virtually the entire media and the two main political parties, the Establishment has untold power to dominate the political narrative and shape public talking points to suit themselves – allowing fierce debate, but only within a tight ‘acceptable’ political spectrum.
Advertisement
Any talk of taxing the rich, reversing privatisation, or tackling inequality, is highly frowned upon – and anyone with any kind of platform who attempts to bring up these subjects is immediately and unrelentingly attacked with the full force of the political and media Establishment.
This hyper-domination of the narrative, added to the demonisation of anyone who strays from it, trickles down into the public conciousness and leads to a rote-learning of arguments and the creation of a false reality where it seems as if there is simply is no alternative.
It’s essentially a case of “So many popular people are saying the same thing that it simply must be true.”
This learned helplessness is routinely displayed by people on social media who clearly aren’t rich, but who routinely mock the idea that taxing the rich could actually work – even though it clearly does!
Advertisement
Hare are some of the more commonly-used arguments, and exactly why they’re complete rubbish:
Argument 1: “If we increased taxes on the rich they’d just find some way of avoiding it anyway!”
Solution 1: Britain controls a huge proportion of the world’s tax havens – and we’re literally the world’s biggest enabler of global tax abuse. We have the power to shut these Tax Havens down any time we want. According to research, Tax Havens based in UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories help the rich avoid a staggering £152 billion in tax every single year – with Jersey and Guernsey adding a further £6.9bn to this total!
Also, regarding our domestic tax laws, we could also just close all the tax loopholes which are intentionally written into our current laws, or just write new laws instead!
Advertisement
Argument 2: “But if we closed all the loopholes, the rich would just move to another country with lower taxes!”
Solution 2: Most rich people who live in the UK have their wealth tied up in fixed assets like land, properties and businesses that they can’t take with them! Even if we raised taxes, they’d still be able to make profits here – but they’d just make slightly less profit. The very worst that could happen is they sell all their fixed assets, uproot their family, and start again somewhere else – but if they did this they’d just leave a gap in the market for someone else to fill and get rich from anyway!
Advertisement
Argument 3: “Taxes are already at their highest levels since WWII!”
Solution 3: Yes, they are. However, ordinary people are now contributing a far higher proportion of the tax burden than they used to due of 40 years worth of tax cuts for the super rich, loopholes that have been built into the system to allow them to avoid tax, and regressive stealth taxes which have been implemented on the rest of us.
In addition, in comparison to other similar countries, the UK actually has a relatively low tax burden – lower than both the EU and G7 average, as shown in the graphs below – meaning there is significant scope to increase taxes on the wealthy.
Argument 4: If we raise taxes on the rich, I might be affected!
Advertisement
Solution 4: But you’re not rich are you?
Argument 4a: No, of course not. But I read the news and they keep warning me that I might be affected. Also, I might actually get rich someday and I wouldn’t want to pay higher taxes even though I’d have more than enough to live comfortably anyway.
Solution 4a: Stop reading the billionaire-owned media, for fuck sake.
How should we tax the rich?
There’s been huge amounts of research conducted into wealth taxes by various charities and progressive think tanks over the past decade or so, looking at as how much money they could raise and the potential positive and negatives effects, but almost all of the research has – surprise surprise – been almost ignored by the mainstream media and polticians.
Whilst properly cracking down on tax avoidance and evasion, and closing existing loopholes within legislation, could raise around £30bn a year.
And just a simple policy such as raising Capital Gains Tax – a tax on unearned income from the sale of assets or investment profits which the rich often benefit from – to the same level as income tax, could raise an extra £12.5bn a year.
Then there’s the idea of equalising the tax system so that people who do absolutely nothing for their income are taxed at the same rate as people who actially work for a living. Because, believe it or not, our tax system currently rewards landowners and landlords far better than nurses and teachers.
Advertisement
For instance, we could implement a Land Value Tax – a radical left-wing policy championed by noneother than the world-famous Socialist, err… Winston Churchill.
“Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains – and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labour and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived.” argued the then Conservative MP in the House of Commons in a rousing speech in favour of a Land Value Tax in 1909.
The fact is that Britain is not broke at all. There’s more than enough wealth to go around. It’s just that tax system has been rigged by the rich in favour of themselves, meaning that wealth is increasingly being siphoned off and stashed away in Tax Havens, laundered through the purchase of economically unproductive assets that gain value over time, or pumped into property in order to generate passive income.
There are countless opportunities to raise money from additional taxes on those who can actually afford to pay them – and absolutely none of the arguments spouted by the billionaire-controlled media against increasing taxes on them and their wealthy chums have any merit whatsoever.
Advertisement
But, for as long as ordinary people continue to be brainwashed against their own interests, the rich and powerful will simply continue to become richer and richer – all at our expense.
And this week, sexologist and therapist Sofie Roos has shared the concerns menopausal women most often bring to her.
1) Reduced sexual desire
Advertisement
“Almost all menopausal women I meet during sex therapy bring up their changed lust and/or decreased interest in sex,” Roos told us.
That’s partly because of the hormonal changes that happen during the life stage, including decreases in oestrogen and testosterone.
Then, there are factors like “stress, tiredness, worse sleep quality, and a changed life situation, such as children moving out,” which Roos says are common in menopause.
For some women, that makes “lust less intense, and it can feel difficult to get as turned on as before”. And for others, it can create a general loss of desire.
Advertisement
2) Vaginal dryness and discomfort
Vaginal dryness is a common symptom of menopause. It can make penetrative sex “uncomfortable and, for some, even painful,” the sexologist shared.
“Decreased oestrogen levels additionally affect vaginal tissue, [which] gets thinner and less elastic, which also can lead to discomfort.”
That can create a fear of sex, which, in turn, decreases drive further, she added.
Advertisement
3) Changes in body image and self-esteem
Often, menopause changes people’s body composition. Roos said that the people she speaks to about menopause often notice changes to their self-esteem and body image as a result.
This “tends to lead to women feeling less attractive and less sensual, which often negatively affects how we feel in intimate situations, leading to one avoiding sex.”
4) Difficulty getting aroused and orgasming
Advertisement
Hormone changes in menopause might mean some people take longer to “get going” in the bedroom, as their levels of sensitivity change.
Roos has noticed this among her clients. “Some women find themselves in a situation where it takes longer to get turned on, or that [orgasm] feels far away and hard to get, or that it’s less intense than previously,” she shared.
“These are also all normal effects of hormonal changes and reduced blood flow to the genital area, and while it’s completely natural, it can still feel extremely frustrating, especially if you don’t understand why it’s happening.”
5) Relationship changes
Advertisement
In Roos’ experience, “menopause often happens at the same time as other big life-changing moments.
“Couples who have been together for a long time often face intimacy issues, identity challenges are common, and on top of this, many families go from living with their kids to just being the parents left in the household – all things that already affect their [relationship to] sex.”
What advice does a sexologist have for women in menopause?
Roos said, “My best advice is to normalise what’s happening, and to openly talk about it with your partner”.
Advertisement
That way, you can largely skip past “shame, misunderstandings and pressure,” and help you to find new solutions.
“Sex during and after menopause tends to need new kinds of physical and emotional stimulation as well as more time than before, so be open to discovering new things and be responsive to how it feels,” she added.
That could mean exploring different kinds of emotional connection, extending foreplay, and/or giving new toys and positions a go.
“A great lube can be a real game changer when experiencing vaginal dryness, and a good vibrator can be what’s needed to be able to orgasm again,” the sexologist continued.
Advertisement
Then, there’s the “boring” stuff: investing in your relationship, eating healthily, and reducing stress where possible, while exercise “benefits blood flow to the vaginal area, but also improves mood, energy and sleep, which all boost your desire.
“Many women eventually realise that the menopause is a chance [to develop] a more relaxed, easy-going and interesting relationship with sex,” Roos ended.
“The sooner you start seeing the menopause as a chance to make the intimacy something new, the sooner you’ll be able to work [towards having] the best sex of your life after 50!”
We hope you love the products we recommend! All of them were independently selected by our editors. Just so you know, HuffPost UK may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page if you decide to shop from them. Oh, and FYI – prices are accurate and items in stock as of time of publication.
Spring is here at last – the birds are chirping, the bees are buzzing and the sun is just starting to peek through the clouds, teasing us with what’s to come during the summer.
But during this tricky, barely-warming-up time of year, getting your transitional dressing right can be such a pain. And that goes double for your fitness gear, which needs to see you through not just rain or shine, but sweat too.
Whether you’re prepping for April’s showers or May’s flowers, give these fashionable fitness ’fits a look in.
Rugby league is cherished by many of the ‘left behind’ towns that become central to Britain’s electoral politics. But now community clubs are fighting to stay afloat, reports Adam Payne
Advertisement
In the run-up to Boris Johnson’s red wall landslide in 2019, rugby league found itself in a peculiar position. Its fans, based mostly in northern England, generally regard the London class, its politicians and media, as having little interest in their sport.
To generations of supporters, it is an ignored and underappreciated game, played a long way from the corridors of Westminster in mileage and in mind, in the towns of Yorkshire, Lancashire and Cumbria.
“Rugby union has always been the sport of the establishment, the media, Westminster, big businesses, even the Royal Family. Rugby league, like most things in the North, it had to fight just to be heard,” says Anthony Broxton, author of Hope and Glory: Rugby League in Thatcher’s Britain.
Naturally, then, there was some bemusement when, in autumn 2019, the spotlight of British politics landed on the Cumbrian coast. Onward, the centre-right think tank with close links to the Conservative Party, had declared rugby league towns to be pivotal to that year’s general election. A new voter archetype had been born: Workington Man.
Advertisement
Will Tanner, one of the brains behind the analysis, who was later chief of staff to Rishi Sunak in No 10, recalls when he and Onward colleague Nick Faith realised that rugby league towns were where key swing voters were hiding.
“When I was listing constituencies we thought would be most important, [Faith] was the one who said nearly all of them are rugby league towns. That was the common denominator, and it was something incredibly resonant and powerful,” Tanner tells The House.
Featherstone Rovers in Yorkshire were not allowed to take part in this season’s competition after falling into administration (Alamy)
Workington Man, set out in Onward’s subsequent report, The Politics of Belonging, was, generally speaking, a retired, non-university-educated male who backed Brexit and valued local pride and security in a fast-changing world. Johnson went on to turn swathes of rugby league towns from Labour red to Conservative blue. Trudy Harrison, the then newly elected Tory MP for Workington’s local rival, Whitehaven, was made his parliamentary private secretary.
Fast forward a few years, and rugby league certainly feels more relevant in Westminster. In Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, the game has a genuine fan in Keir Starmer’s Cabinet; the Wigan MP tells The House it is “very close to my heart”. The same is true of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle.
Advertisement
The knighting last year of legend Sir Billy Boston sparked tentative hope within the game that rugby league would finally play a bigger part in the national story, and there is optimism that Kevin Sinfield will soon be a knight of the realm after raising millions for Motor Neurone Disease research in memory of his former teammate, Rob Burrow. At Labour Conference in Liverpool in September, MPs and ex-players booted up for a tag war of the roses.
Community and belonging, through those rugby league clubs, was fundamental to how people were thinking
But up in the sport’s traditional heartlands, all is not well.
Advertisement
At the heart of the Workington Man analysis was voters in rugby league towns feeling that their local areas were crumbling – their high streets, post offices, pubs – leaving them feeling disheartened and disconnected. And perhaps nothing better captures that sense of community identity than the local rugby league club.
“Community and belonging, through those rugby league clubs, were fundamental to how people were thinking,” reflects Tanner.
The liquidation of Halifax in February stunned the town and disturbed the wider game. How could a 153-year-old club, a cherished community asset, simply cease to exist?
“There was so much shock across the community,” says Kate Dearden, Labour MP for Halifax. “To not have rugby in the town was unthinkable for lots of people.”
Advertisement
Halifax has since returned to the second division under new ownership, albeit with a 12-point deduction, after two weeks of frantic negotiations. It was a “huge, huge relief”, adds Dearden, who says people “travelled miles” to be at the club’s return to the pitch at the start of March.
“It made us sit back and reflect on the importance of rugby league to the town. When you’re so close to losing it – the emotional impact of that on people.”
the town has lost a part of its soul
Advertisement
Lower league sides like your author’s hometown club, Barrow, have recently been forced to crowdfund to stay afloat due to a lack of home fixtures, while Featherstone has been blocked from entering this season’s competition after falling into administration, leaving the West Yorkshire town without a rugby league team until at least 2027.
“The closure of the club has been really, really bad for morale in the area. Even people who don’t necessarily go to watch the match still think Featherstone Rovers is part of their identity,” says Jon Trickett, Labour MP for Normanton and Hemsworth. “At the moment, the town has lost a part of its soul.”
A local crowdfunding effort, led by the True Blue Revival Group, has raised thousands of pounds in a bid to put the club in a position to enter next season under new ownership. “For some people, [the club] is their whole life,” organisers Gareth Dyas and Jock Higgins recently told the BBC.
Why are heartlands club struggling? David Baines, Labour MP for St Helens North and chair of the Rugby League All-Party Parliamentary Group, says falling crowd numbers, driven in part by cost-of-living pressures, are an important factor.
Advertisement
“The communities that they represent, smaller towns in the North of England, are struggling areas. They have less money in their pockets to spend,” he explains.
“People have got difficult choices about where their money goes,” he continues. “Twenty years ago, Netflix didn’t exist, Amazon Prime didn’t exist, Apple TV didn’t exist. Plus WiFi, mobile phone costs…. entertainment that isn’t sport, that isn’t leaving the house. Traditional sports, like rugby league, are competing with that.”
Baines also believes the game has struggled in the face of football, which “dominates absolutely everything”, particularly for younger generations.
There is hope that former rugby league player Kevin Sinfield will be knighted after raising millions for MND research (Alamy)
The Labour MP hopes that the government will be persuaded to look again at loans that were granted to rugby league clubs via the Rugby Football League (RFL) to help them survive the pandemic. Of the near £3m owed by Featherstone when it was put into administration, reportedly around £320,000 was Covid loan repayments owed to the Treasury.
“It’s something I’ve heard from clubs and raised with ministers, with Lisa Nandy and Steph Peacock. The APPG has discussed it. It’s something I’d definitely like the government to look at,” he says, floating the idea, for example, of extending the repayment period to ease the financial strain on clubs.
Advertisement
The RFL’s interim chief executive, Abi Ekoku, says the body was “fully committed to its fiscal responsibility to government” but had suggested to ministers ways “of how best we might balance Covid loan repayment obligations with the need to preserve and upgrade rugby league’s vital community infrastructure”.
He tells The House: “Grassroots rugby league plays a significant anchoring role in many of the UK’s most economically challenged areas. The sport’s social dividend is a very well-known and highly regarded part of Northern England’s social fabric. As such, we are keen to see Covid loan repayments redirected into facilities that help to deliver stability and purpose for the volunteer-led and resource-poor community game”.
Nandy acknowledges that the debt is adding to the problems facing rugby league clubs on “multiple fronts” but says that writing it off altogether is “off the agenda” as government would “have to do it” for other sports. “Forgiving the debt would open the floodgates for other stressed sports,” she says.
In terms of where ministers can help rugby league, Nandy says it must ensure it has “proper systems and governance in place going forwards, that they can act as a cohesive unit and that they can maximise the broadcast revenue that is available”.
Advertisement
She adds that she has been “working closely with a number of the clubs” and talking regularly to the figures in the game to support a plan to “pool their resources so that they get better broadcasters”. The amount of Sky TV money that goes to rugby league clubs has fallen significantly in recent years.
Speaking to The House in a personal capacity, pundit and former player Brian Carney said there had to be stronger checks and balances on rugby league club owners (Alamy)
Brian Carney, TV pundit and former player, is one of the game’s most vocal proponents of reform. Speaking to The House in a personal capacity, he says the RFL governing body ought to shoulder blame for not stepping in earlier to stop “avoidable” club disasters.
“What I’d like to see is them [the RFL] getting ahead of these problems, because some of them you can see galloping at you, clear as day,” he says, pointing to players being paid salaries that clubs cannot afford.
Salford recently had to be revived under a new name after being wound up late last year with debts of over £700,000. Carney argues there needs to be stronger checks and balances, whether it be a more proactive RFL or greater government involvement, to address problems before they escalate rather than “after the fact”.
He suggests that English rugby league may ultimately require oversight like the new football regulator to protect the long-term sustainability of clubs. Reckless owners must take some blame when clubs fall into crisis, he says, but “they needed to have harnesses put on them as, otherwise, as in any other sport, they’ll just run amok, and true fans will be left to pick up the pieces”.
Advertisement
I’ve lived through a dozen or so so-called apocalypses facing the game
Despite the challenges, the rugby league community is defiant. “Featherstone will rise again,” declares Trickett.
Baines says: “I’ve lived through a dozen or so so-called apocalypses facing the game. These headlines have been written a lot since 1895 [when rugby league was founded] by people who want to see the game fail… It is facing challenges, but so does every sport in this country.”
Advertisement
He adds: “Rugby league will still be here in 50 years, 100 years. It will always survive because it’s a great sport to watch, to play, and it’s embedded in communities and loved by hundreds of thousands of people up and down the country.”
Dearden says the speed at which her local community was able to bring Halifax back to life demonstrated the resilience of rugby league fans: “From the get-go, as soon as the news was announced, it was, ‘How do we save our club?’”
Hull KR recently defeated Australia’s Brisbane Broncos to become world champions (Alamy)
There are other reasons for optimism. Crowds are up in the game’s premier division, the Super League, and the early success of York, Bradford and Toulouse’s admission to the league suggests that the contentious franchise model, which determines who plays in the game’s highest bracket, may be starting to bear fruit. Hull, home to the league and world champions, Hull KR, is a fervent rugby league city. KR, Leeds, Warrington and Wigan have played to large crowds in Las Vegas this year and last.
But there is also widespread recognition that if the game is to survive at its lower echelons, then things cannot continue as they are. “There needs to be some deep thinking about how we build community clubs that have a sustainable future. Government should be thinking about this,” says Trickett.
Does the answer lie overseas? There are talks over Australian investment in the English game, which advocates in the northern hemisphere say would bring not just desperately needed cash but expertise that is sorely lacking. While rugby league struggles for national profile in Britain, it is one of the biggest sports in Australia, centred on the National Rugby League (NRL) – brutally demonstrated in Australia’s demolition of England last year.
Advertisement
Peter V’landys, NRL head, has claimed in rather Trumpian terms that the English game is “heading for a train crash” without new money. “The answers don’t presently lie within,” says Carney. He believes that, ultimately, rugby league heartlands will only be lifted out of their struggles when the sport as a whole is more popular.
“It’s not relevant enough for enough people,” he puts it bluntly. “You can send development officers into schools anywhere in the world to promote a particular sport, but unless those kids are seeing it week in, week out, day in, day out, on TV, on billboards, on magazines, online, [players] modelling clothes or boots, it’s irrelevant. If we can raise the profile of the elite-level competition, all those people working at the grassroots level have an easier job selling the game.”
Baines says the English game would “be daft not to want to explore how we can work together” with Australia, but stresses that it would have to be for “the whole health of the game, from the community game upwards”. According to Broxton, rugby league must be better at telling its story: resistance, survival, “doing things differently”.
“In an age where authenticity is everything, rugby league already has the most powerful asset in sport – a genuine story. All it has to do is own it.”
Given the overwhelming amount of sleep advice out there, it can be hard to define what “good” sleep actually means, never mind how to achieve it.
But a white paper from Vitality and The London School of Economics and Political Science has suggested that two numbers – “7-1” – provide a way to “distil the science into a simple rule of thumb”.
What is the “7-1” rule?
Advertisement
The approach, which they estimate could add up to four years to your life and boost the economy, is simple: “aim for seven hours of sleep per night, anchored to a consistent bedtime and falling asleep within a one-hour window (half an hour on either side)”.
Though not included in the name, they added, sticking to this rule at least five nights a week is key to seeing the benefits.
Some previous research has found that sleep consistency is a better indicator of mortality risk than sleep duration. This paper said that falling asleep consistently within a one-hour window lowers mortality risk by 31% and in-hospital admissions by 9%.
Meanwhile, seven hours of sleep is linked to better cognitive performance and mental health among older and middle-aged adults.
Advertisement
Currently, the paper adds, only about 10% of us are believed to meet this standard, which they linked to four additional years of life and “a higher quality of health” throughout.
“Even if one in four poor sleepers were to shift to this sleep pattern, the potential gains would be substantial: reduced healthcare utilisation and costs, improved workplace productivity, and a measurable reduction in premature mortality.”
Donald Trump has warned Iran the United States will “obliterate” Iran’s power plants unless the Strait of Hormuz is re-opened within 48 hours.
The US president issued the ultimatum in an angry post on Truth Social.
Around one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz, but Iran has been attacking tankers trying to use it since the war began three weeks ago.
That has led to a spike in the price of oil, triggering a potential global economic crisis as energy costs soar.
Advertisement
Trump said: “If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!”
It came just a day after Trump said America was preparing to “wind down” its operations in Iran.
In another Truth Social post on Friday, he said: “We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran.”
He said the Strait of Hormuz “will have to be guarded and policed”, but said that responsibility would fall on other countries which rely on it for their oil supply.
Iranian long-range missiles now have the capability of hitting London, Keir Starmer has been warned.
It comes after Tehran targeted Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands, 3,800 kilometres from Iran’s capital, with two missiles.
One was intercepted by a US warship, with the other failing in flight.
The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) said that showed Iran is now able to target major European capitals
Advertisement
“We have been saying it: the Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat,” they said. “Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin.”
Diego Garcia houses a joint UK-US military base, and has has been used as a launchpad for American operations in the Middle East for years.
It has a large airfield, major fuel storage facilities, radar installations and a deep-water port and is home to about 2,500 mostly American personnel.
Foreign secretary Yvette Cooper condemned the “reckless” Iranian attack, but insisted the UK was not involved in America’s “offensive” strikes on Tehran.
Advertisement
She said: “We want to see as swift as possible a resolution to this conflict. Our approach to this conflict has been the same throughout.
“We were not and continue not to be involved in offensive action, and we’ve taken a different view from the US and Israel on this.
“But we are supporting defensive action to support our interests. That includes recognising Iran’s escalating threats to international shipping, as well as their threats to our Gulf partners.”
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said it was time for Starmer to “come clean”.
Advertisement
She said: “Now we find out, from the media and not the prime minister, that the British base on Diego Garcia has been the target of Iranian missile attacks.
“As we saw with Peter Mandelson, Starmer’s first instinct is always to cover up the truth.
“On Wednesday he attacked me at PMQs for calling for the proper defence of our bases, now we learn that as he did so our base in the Chagos Islands was being targeted by Iran.
“The prime minister needs to immediately come clean about the details of this latest attack on British troops and explain why the public weren’t informed sooner.”
This time 15 years ago, some sceptics were seriously still carrying on that tiresome debate about whether a female-led comedy would actually be funny when Bridesmaids arrived on the scene.
Naysayers were more than proven wrong when the comedy came out, and not only made audiences around the world howl with laughter, but became producer Judd Apatow’s highest-grossing film, taking more than £220 million at the box office.
But it wasn’t just the audiences that were won over by the tale of enduring female friendship (and bodily functions). Bridesmaids was also nominated for the Best Musical Or Comedy prize at the Golden Globes, and even earned two Oscar nods, for Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo’s writing and Melissa McCarthy’s performance.
Advertisement
To mark the movie’s 15th anniversary, the cast (minus Wendy McLendon-Covey, sadly) reunited at the 2026 Academy Awards, giving Bridesmaids fans the world over the urge to rewatch our favourite messy comedy – and sing along to Hold On with Annie and pals.
As many of us revisit the hit movie, we’re taking a peek behind the scenes, and it sounds like it was about as much fun to make as it is to watch.
Here are 23 facts you might not have known about how Bridesmaids came together…
It took five years for Bridesmaids to make it off the page and onto the screen
Advertisement
Bridesmaids celebrates its 15th anniversary in 2026
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Getting Bridesmaids to the big screen was certainly not a quick and easy task.
The first table read took place in 2007, with Bridesmaids finally appearing on director Paul Feig’s desk five years after he first heard about it. As he put it, the film saved his career.
“In 2010, I was at a low point,” he told Luxury London. “I was directing internet commercials for Macy’s. I was thinking ‘what am I doing with my career?’. Then I got a call out of the blue saying ‘that wedding movie’ is going to happen.”
Paul cites the film as a “game changer” in terms of his filmmaking, because it took him out of movie jail after the commercial failures of I Am David and Unaccompanied Minors.
Advertisement
Bridesmaids almost had a very different title
Producer Judd Apatow wasn’t originally sold on the film’s title, worried it would put off male cinemagoers.
“To get guys in, we were just going to call it Naked Boobs And Guns, but we didn’t have either one of those things, so we changed it,” Kristen joked to Collider. “We actually had a really hard time, trying to think of the title, to be honest. It was hard.”
In fact, it was nearly called Maid Of Honour, until one of the producers’ friends named his own film that title.
Advertisement
Director Paul Feig and producer Judd Apatow behind the scenes of Bridesmaids in the early 2010s
rSuzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Several comedy actors almost played Megan, the character who propelled Melissa McCarthy to international fame
It’s almost impossible to imagine anyone else in the role of Melissa McCarthy’s boisterous Megan, but a few different people were also in the frame to take on the character, with Paul Feig even claiming that Megan was the most auditioned-for role in the cast.
Speaking to BuzzFeed in 2012, Busy Phillips revealed she was considered for the role, having previously worked with Judd Apatow on the short-lived show Freaks And Geeks.
“The part wasn’t defined necessarily as one thing [when I auditioned],” she recalled. “I was doing a very specific take on it, and they really liked it. But I think, ultimately, Miss McCarthy is perfect in that movie.”
Advertisement
As well as Busy, Rebel Wilson also auditioned for the part, although she ultimately landed the role of Annie’s roommate, Brynn.
It was actually Kristen Wiig who pointed Bridesmaids’ director towards her friend Melissa McCarthy, who at the time was still best known for Gilmore Girls and Mike & Molly
Melissa McCarthy earned an Oscar nomination for her stand-out performance as Megan in Bridesmaids
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Paul Feig told Glamour in 2020: “[Megan] came in and her take on the character was so different than anyone else that it took me a good 10 seconds to even realise what she was doing.”
In a 2011 interview, Paul admitted he was initially unsure why she was playing the character as a “lesbian” doing “weird sex stuff”, before realising he was actually watching a genius at work.
Advertisement
“The mistake a lot of people make in casting is they get so tied to the words and the character they wrote that they don’t see when somebody is better than what they have on the page,” he claimed.
Melissa McCarthy drew inspiration from an unexpected source when putting together her characterisation of Megan in Bridesmaids
She said: “I wanted to do the shirt, the Kangol. Every scene, I would have my glasses on the back of my head.”
Advertisement
Unfortunately for the actor (and maybe the audience), the production team reined her in, and stopped her from looking too much like the Food Network star.
“I tried for a long time to convince them to let me wear short, white, spiky hair, and they were like, ‘You can’t actually be Guy Fieri’,” she laughed.
Oh, and if you didn’t know – Melissa McCarthy shares the screen with her real-life husband in Bridesmaids
Ben Falcone and Melissa McCarthy in January 2019
“Air Marshall Jon” is played by Ben Falcone, with whom Melissa has been married since 2005.
He has also made cameos in almost all of Melissa’s films, including Identity Thief, Spy, The Heat and Can You Ever Forgive Me?.
Advertisement
Bridesmaids was largely improvised by the cast
While Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo put together a hilarious script, with six Groundlings alum on set, there was always going to be some improvisation in the mix, too.
“I’ll be honest, I can’t remember what was scripted and what came out in improv anymore,” Maya Rudolph told Entertainment Weekly. “It all sort of bled together.”
Melissa McCarthy agreed: “In the rehearsal process, you really got to know everyone’s characters before you’re shooting. Even if you didn’t use the specific information, you’d start to build this backstory.
Advertisement
“We had this history as the characters. You’d get more and more comfortable with how [you were] going to play off of each other. I just remember thinking, ‘If this is what making movies is, this is mind-blowing’.”
Maya added that the director gave the cast “free rein to play”, so that by the time they started filming, they all knew each other’s creative processes.
“There was a stenographer who was typing everything that we were improvising. Then we’d come back, and there’d be new pages,” she recalled.
Rose Byrne learnt a new language for that hilarious toast scene
Advertisement
Kristen Wiig’s Annie and Rose Byrne’s Helen come face-to-face for the first time at Maya Rudolph’s character Lillian’s engagement bash
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
During those engagement party toasts, Paul Feig let Kristen and Rose improvise one-upping each other, with hilarious results.
“It went on forever. I just kept laughing. I remember thinking, “Oh, I’m going to have a hard time getting through this movie without ruining takes,” Melissa remembered.
Rose even pretended to speak Thai in one rehearsal, and the producers loved it so much that they made her learn a portion of Thai for real in the final cut.
Helen shares a home with a superhero
Advertisement
Bridesmaids is set between Milwaukee and Chicago, but it was actually filmed in Los Angeles – and film and TV fans may recognise one of the sets from an iconic series.
The comedy was filmed in part at the same location used for the 1960s Batman TV series and film.
Helen’s lavish home, where Annie spectacularly flips out at the Parisian-themed bridal show, famously doubled as Wayne Manor in the retro show.
It’s also Eddie Murphy’s palatial home in Bowfinger and the estate of Kenneth Branagh’s conductor character in Dead Again.
Advertisement
Matt Lucas and Rebel Wilson actually became roommates after appearing as siblings in Bridesmaids
Rebel Wilson and Matt Lucas played Kristen Wiig’s character’s hapless roommates in Bridesmaids
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Matt Lucas and Rebel Wilson play Annie’s roommates in Bridesmaids, and reality ended up mirroring fiction for the funny duo.
“We played roommates so well in Bridesmaids, we thought, ‘Yeah, we’ll do it for real’,” Rebel explained on Conan O’Brien’s talk show in September 2012. “Except instead of annoying Kristen Wiig, we’re now annoying all the neighbours nearby.”
After the film came out, fans suspected they were siblings, or married, because their chemistry was so effortless.
Advertisement
“When we met it was like complete synchronicity,” Matt told the BBC in September 2015. “We’re both very laid back and we’re also quite driven professionally and I see that in her and she sees that in me but we’re not competitive because we just enjoy each other’s work.”
The pair lived together in Los Angeles for three years, until Rebel moved out after making the “decision to become a huge movie star and buy a house”.
The film’s co-writer Annie Mumolo originally wanted to play a main role in Bridesmaids, but it didn’t work out in the end
The lengthy wait for the movie to get made meant that co-writer Annie Mumolo couldn’t RSVP for her role as a bridesmaid.
Advertisement
By the time the movie started filming, Annie was seven months pregnant, and her character was redeveloped for a new actor.
“I was like, I’m living my life and I was having a family,” she told The New York Times in 2021. “So, I got pregnant. [The film] had gotten sort of shelved, and then they called like two weeks later and said, ‘We’re back on!’ And it was like, ‘I’m pregnant. So that’s going to be great’.”
Annie eventually gave birth to her son a week and a half after filming wrapped on Bridesmaids.
Although Annie couldn’t take centre stage in the film, she does appear in the infamous plane scene, playing the woman sitting next to Annie on that turbulent flight to Las Vegas.
Advertisement
Bridesmaids writers Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo also got to share a scene in the movie
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
That flight scene was actually created as a substitute for another chaotic scene that was axed so Bridesmaids wouldn’t be compared to The Hangover
What happens in Vegas stays on the cutting room floor with Bridesmaids.
The release of 2009’s The Hangover forced the team to scrap a messy Sin City bachelorette party adventure that featured in Bridesmaids’ original script.
“We did not want to be compared to The Hangover,” Paul told Insider in 2021. “We did not want to hear, ’This is the female Hangover. That was our kryptonite.”
Advertisement
He later told Glamour: ”[The Hangover] was so big and successful and had done Vegas so well that we were kind of like, ‘Why would we do it again?’. I said, ‘They should just not get to Vegas. It should all fall apart on the plane’.”
This Vegas sequence would have included a visit to a male strip club, where Annie would have been pulled up on stage by a dancer dressed as a cowboy.
There was also a scene where the bridal party went to a male strip club and Annie gets pulled on stage by a cowboy stripper.
Recalling what the scene entailed, Paul told Business Insider: “He has her lie down on the dance floor and dances over the top of her, but ball sweat drips into her open mouth as she’s screaming.”
Advertisement
The Bridesmaids cast pictured ahead of the characters’ ill-fated flight to Las Vegas
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Jon Hamm is uncredited for his work in Bridesmaids
Jon Hamm plays Ted, Annie’s selfish love interest, in Bridesmaids – a role that was both uncredited and mostly improvised.
The Mad Men star’s lack of poster credit was his own request because, at the time, he was better known for his dramatic work, and he worried that his name being attached to the project would mislead audiences into thinking Bridesmaids was not actually a comedy.
He appeared in the film as a favour to Kristen Wiig, with whom he became friends after guest hosting an episode of SNL.
Advertisement
“I did that movie before there was a part, before there was a script, I said ‘yes’ to it. And [my] agents went, ‘Oh, well, shit. How do we, you know, ask for money?’,” Jon said on SiriusXM in 2022. “And I was like, ‘Don’t worry about it. Just let me let go and have fun with friends’.”
Jon’s most famous moment in Bridesmaids – his sex scene with Kristen – was approached more like a fight sequence than a love scene
Jon Hamm in Bridesmaids
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Paul Feig told Glamour that he thought it would be funnier to make the scene look less like romance, and more like “a professional wrestling scene”.
“It was like this big action scene,” he explained. “There’s nothing sexy about that scene at all, and that’s what made it so fun.”
Advertisement
A minor Bridesmaids storyline featuring Paul Rudd was left on the cutting room floor
Ant-Man actor Paul Rudd was originally supposed to appear in a scene with Annie, where his and Kristen’s characters go on an ice-skating blind date together.
The date, of course, goes horribly wrong, with Paul’s character falling to the ground and yelling expletives at children.
Paul Feig told Entertainment Weekly that the scene was “one of the funniest things I’ve ever been a witness to,” and was written to highlight Annie’s bad luck with guys. Unfortunately, this moment is cut from the final edit, but the seven-minute sequence was included on the DVD extras, and has since made its way to YouTube.
Advertisement
Bridesmaids nearly featured another famous cameo – from Matt Damon
Paul Rudd wasn’t the only A-lister who was robbed of an appearance in Bridesmaids. Speaking to Business Insider, Paul Feig revealed in 2021 that Matt Damon was supposed to play himself in a fantasy cameo.
Describing the scene, the director said: “Annie goes in the dressing room to try on this really expensive dress, and suddenly she has a fantasy of what her life could be in this dress.
Advertisement
“It’s this romance feel with her running through the woods and Matt Damon is shirtless chopping wood.”
This romantic fantasy sequence was totally scrapped from the film by Paul and producer Judd Apatow, because “there needed to be a consequence to Annie’s actions”, and she also needed “to be humiliated in front of Helen and the other bridesmaids”.
“So,” he added. “We came up with the food poisoning from being at a shitty restaurant.”
Certain jokes were edited out of Bridesmaids following the death of Jill Clayburgh
Advertisement
Jill Clayburgh and Kristen Wiig in Bridesmaids
Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Bridesmaids, sadly, was Jill Clayburgh’s last performance before her death.
Jill died between filming and the film’s release, which affected some of the jokes that made it into the final cut.
“We took some dirty Jill Clayburgh jokes out because I just thought, ‘that can’t be the last thing she says’,” Judd Apatow told The Playlist, admitting that even if the quips were still “funny” they could be perceived as “questionable”.
Some of these raunchier gags did make the DVD outtake reel, though.
Advertisement
Paul Feig recalled telling the late performer: “I can’t believe we’re making you say this.”
Her response? “Oh I love it.”
“She was so sincerely happy to be doing this kind of comedy that it’s a special memory for me,” he added.
Chris O’Dowd’s Bridesmaids character wasn’t written as Irish in the script
Advertisement
Chris O’Dowd told HuffPost in 2013 that he originally auditioned for Bridesmaids with an American accent – but Paul Feig suggested he try it in his own.
“Paul Feig is a huge Anglophile and knew [The IT Crowd] really well and was a big fan of it,” Chris explained. “He said, ‘Hey, why don’t you try it in your own accent?’. And it just kind of went well and we improvised for a good while like that with Kristen – yeah, and it played well.”
Chris O’Dowd played Rhodes, Kristen Wiig’s on-screen love interest, in Bridesmaids
Judd Apatow also approved of having an Irish love interest, believing it would make the love story a little less formulaic and, in Chris’ words, “odd”.
Kristen Wiig is actually not a fan of the infamous food poisoning sequence
In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter’s Awards Chatter podcast in 2017, Kristen admitted that all the gross-out humour was added into her script by Judd Apatow.
Advertisement
“When people say, ‘Oh, we’re gonna give more female-centered movies a chance,’ you’re not reading the fine print, which is, ‘Oh, but, they have to be like this’,” she claimed. “They want to see women acting like guys.
“The scene was not our idea and it was not in the original script and we didn’t love it. It was strongly suggested for us to put that in there. I didn’t want to see people shitting and puking.”
Apparently, all that fake vomit tasted better than it looked
Ellie Kemper, Melissa McCarthy and Wendi McLendon-Covey in Bridesmaids
Another of the most memorable scenes in Bridesmaids is the moment when the women get food poisoning while trying on wedding outfits.
It looked gross, but Paul Feig told Glamour that the “concoction” that made up the faux vomit actually consisted of oatmeal (“for a little bit of texture”), “some chopped up vegetables” and almond milk”.
Advertisement
That food poisoning scene might feel extreme – but it originally went even further
Paul added that he and the crew made use of a “vomit cannon” at one point.
“There’s a scene that we didn’t put in the movie where Ellie’s character runs in, and Wendi’s like, ‘Get away from me’,” he noted.
“And so she runs down the hall and opens the door and projectile vomits across the room. But when we got in the editing room everyone was immediately like, ‘That’s just too much, we have to take that out.’ We do have some class.”
Advertisement
Kristen Wiig had no idea how big Bridesmaids would go on to become
Paul Feig and Kristen Wiig on the set of Bridesmaids
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
Kristen Wiig admitted recently that she was fairly sure the film would be a box-office failure.
“I remember after opening weekend, they were like, ‘Well, we tried,’” she said on a 2025 episode of Amy Poehler’s Good Hang podcast.
“We just thought, like, that was it. And then I think just more and more people kept seeing it and then it kind of happened later.”
Advertisement
Paul Feig also admitted on Jesse Tyler Ferguson’s Dinner’s On Me podcast that he felt pressure for the film to succeed, even though it was “predicted to not do well right up until the day of release”.
And no, there’s definitely not going to be a Bridesmaids sequel
Bridesmaids has gone on to become a comedy classic – but we definitely wouldn’t hold out hope for a sequel
Suzanne Hanover/Universal/Kobal/Shutterstock
As the case with almost all hit films, people have been desperate for a sequel. Although many key players – including Paul Feig – are open to the idea, Kristen Wiig has explicitly said she has no interest in revisiting Annie and her friends.
During a 2021 appearance on Andy Cohen’s Sirius XM show, she explained, “I just don’t want it to be translated as a negative thing, because we obviously love the movie [but] we feel like we told that story and we were just so excited to do other things.”
Advertisement
Bridesmaids is currently streaming on Amazon Prime Video in the UK.
For the first Peaky Blinders movie, The Immortal Man, Netflix went suitably large for Cillian Murphy’s first feature-length outing as Tommy Shelby.
The big-budget movie, which picks up the story in the Birmingham Blitz of World War Two, seems to have paid off, with the film picking up an increasingly rare box office success as well as critical acclaim.
After a short run in cinemas, the film has landed on Netflix, with new legions of fans streaming the next chapter.
With six seasons and a film now part of the Peaky Blinders’ legacy, you might be wondering where that leaves the franchise and what’s next for the gang (if anything).
Advertisement
Here’s a quick guide to everything we know so far…
Will there be another Peaky Blinders film after The Immortal Man?
So far, there’s been no confirmation of a The Immortal Man sequel, or indeed another film set in the Peaky Blinders universe.
Back in 2021 show creator Steven Knight told Deadline the “plan from the beginning” had been to “end Peaky with a movie”.
Advertisement
Based on how the movie ended, fans can probably agree it’s the last we’ll see of Tommy Shelby – so it would be a surprise if we did see another Peaky Blinders film, at least for the time being.
Barry Keoghan and Cillian Murphy in the Peaky Blinders movie The Immortal Man
What about a new series of Peaky Blinders in the future?
What will the new Peaky Blinders sequel series be about?
Advertisement
Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man acts as a bridge between the initial six series of the show and the new ones.
The sequel series will jump further forward in time and take place after the events of the film, picking the story up in the 1950s.
An official synopsis for the follow-up reads: “Britain, 1953. After being heavily bombed in World War II, Birmingham is building a better future out of concrete and steel.
“In a new era of Steven Knight’s Peaky Blinders, the race to own Birmingham’s massive reconstruction project becomes a brutal contest of mythical dimensions. This is a city of unprecedented opportunity and danger, with the Shelby family right at its blood-soaked heart.”
Advertisement
Meanwhile Knight has promised new characters and adventures, teasing: “The new generation of Shelbys have taken the wheel, and it will be a hell of a ride.”
When can we see the new episodes of Peaky Blinders?
Netflix hasn’t confirmed a release date yet, however we might not have to wait too long according to What’s On Netflix.
The online outlet has reported that filming began in Stoke-on-Trent in early March 2026, suggesting a possible mid-to-late 2027 release date.
Advertisement
Barry Keoghan’s character becomes leader of a new generation of Peaky Blinders in The Immortal Man
Who will star in the new Peaky Blinders seasons?
So far, Netflix and the BBC haven’t officially announced any cast members.
We do know that Cillian Murphy is on board as a producer, so perhaps we could see Tommy Shelby in some flashback scenes.
Reports have suggested that it could be a cast of relative newcomers, with Video Nasty starCal O’Driscoll spotted on set along with How To Get To Heaven From Belfast star Fintan Shevlin and Atomic actor Jacob Wright.
The first six seasons of Peaky Blinders are now streaming on BBC iPlayer, with the film The Immortal Man available to watch on Netflix.
President Donald Trump gave a predictably heartless response to the death of former FBI director and special prosecutor Robert Mueller, who died on Saturday aged 81.
“Robert Mueller just died,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people!”
Mueller served as special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, and became a target for Trump and his MAGA base. His family announced last August that he was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 2021.
While Mueller’s investigation uncovered contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 election, Mueller declined to charge Trump with obstruction, saying that while he had sufficient evidence to charge Trump, he was prohibited because Trump was the sitting president at the time.
Advertisement
Despite this, Trump spentyearsattacking Mueller for an investigation that ultimately let him off the hook.
Less than an hour after expressing glee at the death of Mueller, Trump was back to his usual attacks on Truth Social.
“The Fascist Democrats will never protect America, but the Republicans will,” Trump said in a post threatening to send Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to patrol airports across the US.
Democratic lawmakers and pundits are unleashing on President Donald Trump for his social media post celebrating the death of Robert Mueller, the former FBI director and special counsel who oversaw the 2016 investigation into Russian election interference, calling it “disgusting” and “insane.”
A cause of death has not yet been disclosed, though two people familiar with the situation told MS NOW that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease.
The post drew fiery responses from legions of Democratic politicians and media personalities, who decried its callousness and mourned Trump’s ongoing indifference to the presidential decorum of the past.
“I expect every Republican who was outraged at people for celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death to immediately condemn Trump for saying, ‘I’m glad he’s dead’ about Robert Mueller,” wrote liberal political influencer Harry Sisson on X. “This is disgusting.”
Many Trump supporters are defending him, however, arguing that Mueller spread “the most destructive lies of the 21st Century” and was “a piece of garbage” for his so-called “persecution” of Trump. Other conservatives condemned the post.
Mueller, seen here testifying in 2019 on his report on Russian election interference.
Susan Walsh/Associated Press
Democratic Representative Dan Goldman called Mueller “a true public servant” in his social media tribute, writing: “Yet the President of the United States disgustingly celebrates Mueller’s death simply because he exposed Trump’s efforts to steal the 2016 election.”
Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan argued that far too many journalists are reporting on Trump’s post without any detraction, writing, “Very few acknowledgments of how insane and inappropriate it is for the president to respond like this.”
He added, “Imagine their response if it was [former President Joe] Biden.”
Below are more responses to Trump’s Mueller post:
Advertisement
What’s telling here, of course, is that Trump has always insisted Mueller CLEARED him
Trump’s psychotic reaction here suggests: even TRUMP knows Mueller DID NOT clear him pic.twitter.com/K2FAV3FdCp
In an era when many young men—including President Trump—were trying to avoid serving in Vietnam, Mueller not only volunteered for the Marines after graduating from Princeton—he spent a year waiting for an injured knee to heal so he could serve. I have always found that be the… https://t.co/eEzjpP56Kr
The cruelty is the point. Trump’s goal is to distract you from rising gas prices, his aimless war, ICE abuses, and the Epstein files. Don’t give him what he wants.
And may Robert Mueller, a US Marine and lifelong public servant, rest in peace. https://t.co/C51NTOt2rq
You must be logged in to post a comment Login