Politics
Adrian Hilton: The decline and fall of the Oxford Union
Adrian Hilton is a conservative academic, theologian and educationalist.
‘If you want to run for the Union – and it’s not a bad thing to do – make your reputation outside first’, Charles Ryder was advised in Brideshead Revisited as he was about to go up to Oxford.
It wasn’t bad guidance from his cousin Jasper, but the reputational sphere was restricted to improving oratorical technique at the Canning or Chatham clubs, with the exhortation of discipline to ‘begin by speaking on the paper’. For the disimpassioned, it was rather prosaic guidance.
For those more inclined to the Sebastian Flyte school of reputation-making, you could walk up and down Catte Steet in dove-grey flannels and a crêpe-de-chine scarf supping Cointreau with an old bear named Aloysius. Or editing the Isis while dreaming of a rowing blue and sauntering nightly around the Bodleian dressed like something out of Gilbert & Sullivan. Or joining the O.U.D.S and giving such a mesmerising Hamlet or Faustus that the high-table toasts would hail you as the heir to Gielgud. But for a certain type of student, the presidency of the Oxford Union is the zenith of realisation; the chamber where love dies and the political bonds of callow reputation are forged by bluster and zest. Here are planted the seeds of life’s harvest while they learn the art of secular ritual and taste the ecstasy of oratorical victory. By shaking hands with the great and the good, you were almost anointed to become one – a bishop, captain or cabinet minister, at least, if not one day prime minister.
And many have indeed joined the ranks of the elite, right from the society’s inception. The first to become an MP was Digby Wrangham who was president in 1826 and entered Parliament just five years later in 1831. Others so destined include Thomas Acland, William Ewart Gladstone, Herbert Henry Asquith, George Curzon, and Quintin Hogg. More recent years have yielded Michael Foot, Edward Heath, Anthony Crosland, Tony Benn, Michael Heseltine, William Hague, and, of course, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove. The undisputed and disputable heirs to two centuries of intellectual enlightenment and political tiffs.
The first Jewish president was elected in 1910 (Leonard Stein); the first Asian in 1934 (Dosabhai Framji Karaka); the first black president in 1942 (James Cameron Tudor), and it didn’t take long after women were permitted to become full members in 1963 for the first female president to be elected (Geraldine Jones in 1968). And feminine stares of disdain proved just as deadly as any man’s guile: they presided with the same clear eyes and toiling lungs.
As each university intake became progressively diverse, reflecting the increasing pluralism in society, so junior officers became more ethnically and racially diverse. Over the past year alone, the society has had its first Arab president (Ebrahim Osman-Mowafy), two Pakistani presidents (Israr Kahn and Moosa Harraj), and, mirroring the rise of Kemi Badenoch to lead the Conservative Party, its first black female president (Nigerian, Anita Okunde). Recently ousted president-elect George Abaraonye was also of Nigerian descent, and the newly elected president-elect, Arwa Elrayess, is a Palestinian Arab. She is presently promoting a myth claiming to be the ‘first Palestinian’ ever elected president, which is only true if she ignores the Palestinian Jew (Gershon Hirsch) elected in 1941.
The thing about racial/ethnic/cultural diversity is that the term-card of each president tends to reflect something of their social concerns and political priorities, if not sectarianism. They know it all, and they like to keep people small. Thus, when an Arab president inclines to the proposition ‘This house believes Israel is an apartheid state responsible for genocide’, and vacates the chair in order to speak himself in favour of the motion, it follows that the environment becomes distinctly hostile to those who argue against, if not a scene of desolation for Jews more generally. They seem to have become the undesirables.
There are geo-political contextual variables for such debates, of course. But some of the speakers in this one were deemed not only to have sailed close to the lauding of Hamas as worthy of emulation, but to have crossed the line with their glorification of terrorism and incitement to racial hatred. One of the speakers, Susan Abulhawa, is currently suing the society on the grounds that the standing committee was advised to edit the video of her speech to conform to the statutory requirements relating to the promotion of terrorism and racial/religious hatred; a censorship which she considers not only an infringement of copyright and breach of contract, but defamatory and discriminatory.
Over the past decade, an erstwhile liberal debating society has become more overtly hostile to members who hold certain political-philosophical views. When Jews hear a speaker addressing Zionists, saying: “You don’t know how to live in the world without dominating others. You have crossed all lines and nurtured the most vile of human impulses,” the animosity, if not hatred, oppresses souls. You could have a philosophical debate about the meaning of ‘Zionism’ in this context, but the vehemence of enmity precludes it. There is a kind of ‘cleansing’ going on, if not an ‘occupation’ being instituted, which often manifests itself with threats and intimidation of both invited speakers and those who dare to speak on the floor. Recent debates have not only been distinctly anti-Israel, anti-American and anti-capitalist in flavour, but increasingly focused on multiculturalism, pro-Islam, the Global South, international courts, the Ottoman Empire, Kashmir, the Arab Spring, Khamenei’s Iran, Modi’s India, and so on. It has become a foreign ground, unrecognisable from even a decade ago.
This focus is exacerbated by the post-graduate international intakes of some colleges and associated institutions. The Saïd Business School, for example, is proudly diverse and global, and (uniquely) currently offers free life membership of the Oxford Union to all their Masters and DPhil students. That is at least 550 memberships (and around £120,000, discounted in a ‘bulk membership’ deal) every year, as against the dozen or so undergraduates who might join from each of the colleges. This institutional ‘entryism’ has a distorting effect not only on the election of officers and motions for debate, but also on the culture of the society. The financial dependence also inclines to the tolerance of domineering postgrads. It is also worth noting that Saïd’s bloc-funding accounts for around 30 per cent of annual OUS membership income, making it difficult to sustain the assertion that the university and society are completely separate.
This is a deal that perhaps the Saïd Business School should urgently reconsider.
Following the Israel debate presided over by Mowafy, numerous complaints were raised and formal investigations initiated by those who faced his reproaches. In a damning report, he was found to have harassed, bullied and victimised people; caused significant offence and distress; abused the rules of debate; exposed the society to serious legal jeopardy; risked criminal liability for standing committee members; disparaged and fostered hostility against the society’s legal counsel by referring to him as a ‘Zionist’; was persistently obstructive, hostile and disruptive in meetings, and otherwise engaged in conduct liable to bring the society into disrepute. So serious has been his chronic campaign of disruption, manipulation and intimidation that the OUS corporately deemed it necessary to recommend the most severe disciplinary sanction: permanent expulsion from membership. His presidency was authority without dignity. The alarming thing is that the subsequent election of two others who agreed with him to the Standing Committee resulted in the withdrawal of the complaint before it could be heard by the Senior Disciplinary Committee.
As if that weren’t enough, Anita Okunde hosted a Hamas-lauding speaker and whipped up a tribal chant of ‘Free Palestine’. She, too, received a motion of no confidence in her leadership for bullying and dictatorial behaviour, which she casually brushed off with her sex: “Sadly, this is not the first time I or others have faced misogyny, threats, or discriminatory behaviour during my time at the Union,” she said.
Other pro-Palestine meetings have ended with chants of ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’, with all its genocidal connotations. Anyone who expresses concern about this is isolated and harassed. If you get on the wrong side of some, they take it out of you in debilitating procedural ways. At the time of writing, there are active disciplinary cases against the president, librarian, treasurer, secretary, ex-treasurer, librarian-elect, deputy returning officer, and three members of the standing committee. These have been brought by a president-elect, two ex-presidents, the ex-librarian, ex-treasurer, and three other members of the standing committee. There are also corporate complaints against a member of the standing committee for disseminating inciteful pamphlets; against another for intimidation and blackmail; and another for ‘weaponising’ the society’s noticeboard and unauthorised recording of proceedings. Ferrets in a sack would have more dignity than this internecine litany of retaliatory disorder.
It is important, however, not to aquatint the Oxford Union of centuries past in some arcadian Brideshead of mild, elegant, gentlemen-scholars, where life kept pace with punting in the autumn mists and opinions were articulated with a mild sacerdotal authority. The society has been riven with division, beset with infighting and endured existential schisms since the 19th century. Indeed, the foundation of the United Debating Society in 1823 lasted only until 1825, when the only solution to irreconcilable differences was dissolution and re-foundation as the Oxford Union Society, with the malcontents expelled. And again in 1833, the exasperation of established Conservatives with the insurgent Liberal standing committee led to the Tory ‘Ramblers’ splitting off and forming a separate society, which in turn led to their expulsion en masse for setting up a rival society to God’s, as immortalised in the poem Uniomachia (‘Battle at the Union’). In 1847, the OUS set up its (extant) trust deed after a faction tried to sell off assets to aid victims of the Irish potato famine (and to this day, there remains a prohibition on OUS funds being donated to charity).
If the present political rot runs deep, the financial corrosion runs deeper. The society is currently facing bankruptcy as its junior officers do what all ‘here-today, gone tomorrow’ (aspiring) politicians do: carry on regardless, because tomorrow will somehow take care of itself. It is forecast to make almost a £400,000 loss in the year 2025/26, and has less than £800,000 in reserve. Today’s presidents can spend £5,000 on Bollinger, £1,800 on peacocks, and £750 on an ice sculpture, leaving tomorrow’s presidents to worry about austerity. But the problem is not so much the riotous exuberance of OUS young bloods as the dereliction of duty of the grown-ups in the Oxford Literary and Debating Union Trust (OLDUT), which owns the Grade II* listed buildings and is the charitable arm of the society (or, rather, the OUS is OLDUT’s legal delegate for its fiduciary obligations). It was established in 1975 following another bankruptcy scare. There was a fear that in order to pay its debts, the society would sell off some of its buildings to the university or a private developer. A group of former officers raised enough money to bail out the OUS and buy the buildings in the name of a charitable organisation with the stated aim of ‘The Advancement of Education with the University of Oxford by the provision of debates and the maintenance of Library and Reading Room facilities’. OLDUT therefore provides the OUS with access to its ‘non-commercial rooms’ (libraries and debating chamber) for free, and allows access to its ‘commercial rooms’ (bar, snooker room, and a couple of others) for a nominal fee. Incredibly, even the bar is currently operating at a loss.
OLDUT has a vested interest in the governance, functioning and flourishing of the OUS because it is only able to meet its charitable educational objectives by supporting it. The OUS is an unincorporated association: it has no legal personality and is owned equally by its 140,000+ global members but led by Oxonians in statu pupillari. This symbiosis initially had substantial buy-in from significant ex-presidents, including Sir Jeremy Lever and Michael (Lord) Heseltine, who remains patron of the charity. In 2019, following another scandal where a blind black student was violently ejected from the chamber, which led to a national outpouring of condemnation of the society for brutality and racism, another body was set up to oversee the decisions of the bursar. He supervises all elements of the running of the society; students being deemed too inexperienced, unreliable, and impermanent to hold the full-time staff to account. This body, called the Audit Committee, has seen numerous resignations recently, most notably that of its founding chair, Miles Young, Warden of New College.
Over the past five years there have been three bursars and two acting bursars. OLDUT paid a five-figure sum for a headhunting firm to find suitable candidates for the bursar vacancy in 2021 and again in 2023, both of whom resigned after less than two years citing the society as ‘ungovernable’. Five trustees have also resigned over the past two years, and there is currently no bursar at all. The past five years have also seen three senior librarians and three senior treasurers, most attributing their departures to a hostile working environment and a culture of utter thanklessness.
The scale and rate of turnover of those who are supposed to keep the society running has been profoundly destabilising. They are like the permanent civil service to the ‘here today, gone tomorrow’ student officers, and without them it is hard to see anything but a path of chaos and increasing irrelevance. At the turn of the millennium, some 40-50 per cent of undergraduates were members; today it is just 10-15 per cent. This decay has a sympathetic background in the degradation of the Union buildings, with leaking roofs, unstable chimney stacks, precarious load-bearing joists, and plaster crumbling from ceilings. The repairs and renovations, which are urgent, have an estimated cost of £4-5million. It’s not impossible the buildings might need to close altogether for health and safety reasons.
And ‘health and safety’ is but one of the governance tensions – or accountability obfuscations – in urgent need of reform. All the statutory regulatory requirements are presently in the hands of bright but inexperienced students who circulate every eight weeks, giving zero continuity and scant need of responsibility. The priorities, specialisms and competencies of one cohort will not be the same as those of the next. It is therefore possible, if not highly probable, that the students, while being responsible as tenants for the care and upkeep of the building, may know nothing at all about the necessary standards and expectations. Any why should they bother acquiring the knowledge if they won’t be there in eight weeks? Yet ultimate liability for safety resides with the adults of OLDUT.
It is the same with employment issues, where students have a veto on hiring and firing. They are also in charge of data protection, financial accounting, licensing compliance, ensuring conformity to equality and discrimination legislation, and the appointment of society trustees. In practice these are overseen by the bursar, but he is accountable to the student standing committee (who can fire him). Essentially, the students can be ignorant, indolent, reckless or all three, but it is the trustees of OLDUT who will be fined or go to prison, and their reluctance to intervene is bordering on apathy and negligence. Without liability insurance, it is small wonder some are showing signs of severe stress or simply resigning.
With successive scandals, lawsuits, looming bankruptcy, terrorism investigations and breaches of charity law, the society has become a byword of iniquity from Christ Church to Somerville: students possessed with vaulting ambition, their lives governed by moral-political imperatives garlanded with the conceit of personal infallibility. They seem to dream more of their future entry in Debrett’s than care for the stewardship of ‘the most prestigious debating society in the world’.
If losses continue to mount, the Oxford Union may not have long left as a ‘going concern’, but if it does go bankrupt all would not be lost. Indeed, history would simply repeat itself, with OLDUT nominating a new body to take over the debating society and library functions in exactly the same way that OUS rose in 1825 from the ashes of the United Debating Society. That assumes, of course, that the toxic fallout from OUS self-destruction doesn’t bring OLDUT to the edge of bankruptcy by crippling its fundraising capacity and impeding urgent building renovations.
If this Jacobean tragedy is to end, the incestuous strife and internecine inquisitions need to cease.
There is an urgent need for reform of the governance structure, and here there is an ember of sanity just about glowing in the form of the Concerned Alumni of the Oxford Union. That body has the knowledge, expertise and dedication to wrest the society from those agents of destruction who view it as an institutional relic ripe for repurposing to their political ends. George Abaraonye takes the view that “some institutions are too broken, too oppressive to be reformed. Like cancers of our society, they must and they should be taken down by any means necessary”. His infiltration might have failed, but others are intent on blasting the foundations if the superstructure doesn’t crumble first. Blind to their own malignancy, those who are hostile to the history and traditions of the society and its foundational charitable objects cannot possibly lead it. The task of OLDUT is to intervene when such radicals emerge whose concern with debate and freedom of speech ceases when their agenda is challenged or their creed derided. At the very least, students who aspire to governance must begin to take on statutory responsibilities in order that the laws of trusteeship can hold them personally to account. If, then, they seek to repurpose the prestige of the society by subverting its integrity and fund-raising capacity, they would be accountable not only to internal disciplinary bodies, but to the courts, with all the judicial gravity, legal liability, and potentially life-long consequences that would entail.
If these reforms are much delayed, it will be 1825 all over again.
The Trades Union Congress (TUC) has renewed its calls for an increase in the bank surcharge tax. This comes as UK households and firms face the effects of “Trumpflation”.
The bank surcharge is an additional 3% corporation tax on the profits of banking companies exceeding £100m. In April 2023 the Conservatives reduced it to this level from 8%.
With Donald Trump’s illegal war unleashing economic chaos, the union body says it’s vital that banks play their part in any efforts to protect the economy by paying their fair share in tax.
The longer the war goes on, the more likely support for households and industry will be necessary. And that will require funding.
The TUC says working people are facing the impact of the Trump-made cost of living crisis. And it urges the government to pull out all the stops to protect households and firms.
The union body adds that banks must play their part in rebuilding Britain and funding our public services like schools, hospitals and local councils.
City of London fat cats
The call comes as analysis reveals City bonuses have reached record levels as banks continue to enjoy sky high profits.
In 2025 the average bonus in the finance and insurance sector was £20,300 – the first time it has topped £20,000. City bonuses grew 6.3% in 2025, which represented the highest growth for three years.
For the economy as a whole, total bonuses in the City amounted to £23.6bn in 2025. Again, this is the highest figure on record.
Using the latest HMRC corporation tax receipt figures, the TUC estimates bank profits were £35.2bn in 2024-25. Over the last three years profits have averaged £36.5bn. This is 57% higher than the average of profits in the three years ahead of the global financial crisis (£23.2bn).
Time for action on banks
The TUC is calling for an increase in the bank surcharge, which it says could raise significant funds over the coming years. Particularly given the scale of banks’ current windfalls,
Bank profits have been turbocharged by the removal of the bank surcharge. And this has come just as high interest rates meant excess profits for banks. Together, this has led to higher returns both from net interest (the difference on interest charged to borrowers and paid to savers) and interest paid to banks on reserves they hold at the Bank of England.
As a result, bank profits are now much higher than they were in the period before the financial crisis. But after the pandemic, the Conservatives slashed taxes on banks.
TUC analysis reveals an increase in the bank surcharge could raise between £23bn-55bn over the next four years:
- A 16% surcharge, which is doubling what it originally was before the Conservatives cut it, would deliver £23bn.
- A 35% surcharge, which would be the same level as the windfall tax the Conservatives imposed on energy companies, would deliver £55bn.
- Even just reversing the Tory cuts and setting it at 8% – which the TUC says is the “bare minimum” – would raise £9bn over the next four years.
The union body also warns that if interest rates remain higher for longer, banks will make even more money.
Public support
Recent TUC polling shows significant support for a windfall tax on banks, with two in three (66%) backing this approach. This rises to 83% among Conservative to Labour switchers in the 2024 general election and 73% among Labour voters from the 2024 election now leaning to Reform.
The TUC is also calling for the government to reinstate the cap on banker bonuses to curb excessive pay for senior City executives while the rest of the country struggles with a continued cost of living crisis.
The EU still has a bonus cap, which seeks to reduce excessive risk taking (of the sort that led to the last financial crisis) and align pay with long-term stability not short-term gains.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said:
Donald Trump’s illegal war abroad risks unleashing economic chaos at home.
It’s absolutely right that the government does everything it can to protect British households and firms from Trumpflation.
The longer this war goes on, the more likely the government will need to step in with increased support.
That’s why it’s now more vital than ever that banks pay their fair share in tax. Getting banks to contribute more is just common sense.
After the Tories slashed the bank surcharge, high interest rates created a profits bonanza for banks. And if rates remain higher for longer, banks are set to cash in even more.
Instead of lining their own pockets with eyewatering bonuses, it’s only right that banks’ bumper profits are taxed fairly to invest in our hospitals, schools and local councils.
Featured image via the Canary
The Iranian government has said it will destroy all oil facilities around the Gulf region rather than let the Trump-Netanyahu axis get its hands on, or destroy, its Kharg Island oil terminal. The warning came after the US launched an attack of about fifteen bombs on military facilities on Iran’s island. Trump, typically, called the attack:
one of the most powerful bombing raids in the History of the Middle East, [which] totally obliterated every MILITARY target in Iran’s crown jewel, Kharg Island.
The tiny island in the Persian gulf holds an oil terminal handling around 90% of Iran’s oil exports, as well as military defences. Trump has also threatened the oil terminal, and has been obsessed since at least 1988 with taking it for US profits. Iran, however, said it would destroy the whole region’s oil-handling capabilities rather than let his tiny hands touch it.
The IRGC-linked Fars News Agency said on Saturday 14 March 2026 that more the US caused more than 15 explosions targeting Iran’s air defences, airport and naval base. It said that if Trump attacks Kharg or any of Iran’s energy infrastructure:
…all oil and gas infrastructure in the region in which the U.S. and its allies have interests will be set on fire and destroyed.
Given Iran’s success in bombing US bases in the region and Israeli occupied Palestinian cities, few would doubt that Iran is capable of carrying out its threat. This would trigger a global oil crisis as well as almost certainly collapsing the ‘petrodollar’, the main thing propping up the US currency with over 1 Trillion demand on USD annually from the region.
Is Trump stupid enough to gamble that Iran is bluffing? Absolutely. Whether he actually will remains to be seen.
Featured image via Raksha Anirveda
The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has released a seventeen-page report on Israel’s targeting of Palestinian Muslims. The report, released on the final Friday of Ramadan, documents the rising attacks on Muslims in Palestine.
In recent years, Ramadan has been associated with increased attacks on Palestinians by Israeli police and settlers alike, often working in close collaboration with one another. This report covers longstanding trends of these annual increases in attacks.
It also addresses new administrative measures introduced this year, to curtail Muslims’ ability to observe traditional religious practices associated with Ramadan. This includes bans on traditional roles, as well as bans on decorations and restriction of access to holy sites.
As well as these increased measures during Ramadan, the report also covers Israel’s systematic attack on mosques in Gaza, since the beginning of the genocide in October 2023. In total, Israeli forces have destroyed or heavily damaged about 1,160 out of Gaza’s 1,244 mosques, amounting to 93.2% of total mosques.
Religious apartheid against Muslims
The report comprehensively outlines Israel’s violations with international law. And it also highlights new legislative efforts within Israel to further entrench religious apartheid against Muslims. These include the 2023 Amendment to Counter Terrorism Law and the ongoing ‘Call to Prayer Bill’, both of which infringe upon Muslims’ rights to practise their religion freely.
Finally, the report provides a list of recommendations to both Israel and third state parties. The report calls on third party states such as the UK to explore and enact measures to:
- Ensure the accountability of perpetrators of international crimes, grave human rights violations and abuses by Israel and illegal settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories.
- Comply with all international legal obligations, namely pertaining to the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion of July 2024 and the Geneva Convention.
- Cease aiding or assisting in the commission of violations.
International Centre of Justice for Palestinians senior legal officer Dania Abul Haj said:
Since the beginning of the war on Iran, Israeli authorities have now ordered the total closure of Al Aqsa mosque, banning worshippers from prayer there and citing ‘safety measures’ which is ironic considering that everything else in the city remains open, including restaurants, cafes, shops, institutions.
It is also ironic considering the decades-long military oppression against Palestinians and the contradiction between statements and practice at times.
Israel is trying to impose a new reality in which they have full control over Al Aqsa Mosque and Haram Al Sharif. However, it is important to remind Israel, that as an occupying power, it has no sovereignty over religious sites in Jerusalem, and this is in contravention with its international obligations.
Featured image via the Canary
Although they have taken part in film and theatre festivals in various European countries, Yousef Shalabi and his team at Jenin Creative Cultural Centre have not visited the UK since 2006. Many changes have taken place since then.
Jenin Creative Cultural Centre — ‘Despite the pain we can celebrate our music’
He tells the Canary:
There’s now a new generation, a new era of suffering and madness in the Middle East. There are lots of changes, but unfortunately they do not give us a better life. Democracy, human rights, the international community and freedom have failed us many times over the years. All the world saw what happened in Gaza, and the unlimited destruction. And this has destroyed the dreams of the Palestinian people of having their independent state. We saw that Europe and the US want to stop the war in Ukraine, but when it comes to Palestinian rights, no one cares. International institutions are also facing collapse, and there is not even support for UNRWA, the last institution supporting the Palestinian refugees. So really, so much has happened.
The musicians from the centre are hoping to return to the UK later this year. Their goal is to show people that despite all the daily hardships Palestinians face, they are carrying a message of hope.
Shalabi says:
We want to live in peace, with dignity, as all other nations do, and to build a future for our kids. Despite the pain, we can celebrate our music and let others enjoy it too. We also want to create awareness among the British people, and let them know we salute them for their solidarity, and their big demonstrations in support of Palestine. Hopefully this tour will happen and will be as successful as the one in 2006.
Psychological trauma and economic hardship part of daily Palestinian life
Jenin Creative Cultural Centre was established in 2005, as a response to the Jenin Refugee Camp massacre of 2002, by the Israeli occupation. Destruction was widespread in the camp, and many residents were displaced. According to Shalabi, there was a growing need at the time for psychological support, especially for the women and children.
Now, more than 20 years later, the needs of the community are greater than ever. The Israeli occupation recently forcibly displaced all 17,000 residents from Jenin Refugee Camp, as part of its campaign to ethnically cleanse the occupied territory of Palestinians. Currently, the West Bank has also been plunged into its deepest economic crisis on record. So the work of the Jenin Creative Cultural Centre has become essential.
But tightened movement restrictions since October 2023, as well as safety concerns due to increased violence by the Israeli occupation forces (IOF), have made it much more difficult for Palestinians to make their way to the centre. So the staff — who are all volunteers — go to the community instead. Shalabi says several of the musicians have faced severe problems, while growing restrictions have also prevented them from getting together to play music.
One musician lost his brother, who was killed by a drone in front of his house in the Jenin camp. Another two became displaced with their families. One of them was Alaa. He toured with the Jenin Creative Cultural Centre 20 years ago, but has now lost everything. It’s so important to have such musicians to play our music, despite the horrible conditions. They used to play to groups of 60 children at the centre, but we now go mainly to the Arab American University.
Art is a tool which can be used to heal Jenin
There are around 600 families currently staying at the university, who were displaced from Jenin Refugee Camp more than 14 months ago. They still know nothing about what has happened to their homes. Many children are among them, so Jenin Creative Cultural Centre also does activities for them, such as facepainting, while running workshops for the women.
While those forcibly displaced from Jenin Refugee Camp are particularly affected by depression and trauma, Shalabi says the daily lives of others in Jenin are no less traumatic, with many having lost family members, and friends. Allowing people to talk about the hardships they have endured is sometimes enough to help them leave behind the traumatic situations they have faced. But sometimes they may need something more.
We see art as a tool, for healing. It creates an atmosphere of peace and relaxation. We wanted to create a safer place, where children can practice hobbies. Our projects, such as our pottery workshop, also help women develop new skills, to enable them to get a livelihood and some income.
An important part of Jenin Creative Cultural Centre’s work is also to build bridges with the international community, and create awareness of the ongoing situation caused by ‘Israel’. Shalabi says they want to invite their friends from around the world to not only volunteer and bring their various skills to the local Palestinian community, but to also live with the Palestinian people, and experience life under occupation.
He adds:
There are also lots of interesting historical sites in the Jenin area, and you can enjoy the Palestinian food. This is an invitation for anyone who is interested to come and see, and live with us, and show the Palestinians your solidarity.
Help Jenin Creative Cultural Centre’s musicians play traditional Palestinian music to a UK audience
Jenin Creative Cultural Centre needs to raise £10,000 for their three week trip to the UK. There are plans for musical evenings to take place in universities, cinemas and centres in both England and Scotland.
The plan is for six volunteers from the centre to take part in the tour, including five musicians. These include a singer, a keyboard player, a traditional Palestinian flute player, and a musician who plays the Oud — one of the oldest string instruments, originating in the Middle East.
Shalabi says:
You will miss a lot if you don’t come. We are sure you will enjoy our performance of Palestinian traditional music, and you will dance. Music is a way to unify people for peace and entertainment, and hopefully we will meet you all with the spirit of happiness.
Please send donations to this link
Featured image via author
‘Compare us with every other party in the House of Commons today and we’re easily the most united, with the biggest smile on our face’, Ed Davey informed the Financial Times in January. Well, Ed Davey has always been more of a clown than a contender, even if he is favoured by the provincial middle-class demographic that dominates the party’s membership. Restore UK MP Rupert Lowe spoke for those of us outside this bubble when posting his opinion of Davey on X: ‘You are a low-IQ gnome whose talents would be better suited to fishing bits of bird shit out a garden pond.’
This jibe was a response to one of Davey’s many attacks on Elon Musk – ‘He must be held to account for what he is: a purveyor of child pornography’, said Davey in January. But it could have been a response to any one of the Lib Dem leader’s desperate grabs for attention. Just this week, he was calling for the cancellation of King Charles’s trip stateside in July, to mark the 250th anniversary of the United States Declaration of Independence. He claimed the king’s presence would be a ‘diplomatic coup for President Trump… someone who repeatedly insults and damages our country’.
Like Musk, Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump has become a regular target of Davey’s posturing and tweeting, all of which is as embarrassing as the stunts he embarks on to highlight local concerns. He slid down a waterslide to promote children’s mental-health services. He drummed on an exercise ball to highlight social care. He bungee jumped to encourage voters to support his party at the 2024 General Election, and rode a roller coaster at Thorpe Park to launch its manifesto. Throughout this, Ed Davey wears what Quentin Crisp, when describing the face he settled on to face the world, called a look of ‘fatuous affability’. You could state the number of victims of largely Pakistani grooming gangs, or reveal that ABBA had reformed, and Davey’s expression would remain the same.
Actually, the second of these is the safe topic more likely to begin a discussion among the party faithful. If the Lib Dem leader dared to draw attention to the systematic rape of white working-class girls, it would doubtless be via a flume ride at Center Parcs. That’s not to imply that he is not a moral man. Davey sees himself as a saviour with a mission, fully aware of his priorities. In 2025, he said he had a ‘moral duty’ to ensure that Nigel Farage does not become British prime minister.
The largest concentration of support for the Liberal Democrats is in the West Country, where a battle royal with Reform UK is expected to commence at the next General Election. I have some skin in the game, as someone who moved from my native London to this territory a decade ago. I found decent, generous people, who fed and watered me during cocktail hour, among Lib Dem supporters. Politics was avoided like bad etiquette, until Brexit, Donald Trump, the pink ladies’ protests, and marches against grooming gangs and mass immigration arose amid the chit-chat and clinking glass. Then things got ugly. When it came to politics, these people were not the people I thought they were, but they were the people I feared they might be. As they are quick to condemn and caricature those without the luxury beliefs permitted within the echo chamber in which they exist, permeated by those of a similar class, status and pedigree (I’m the exception to the rule), I feel no hesitation in sharing my field notes on those loyal to Lib Dem land.
The provincialism of the middle-class Lib Dem loyalist is not attributable to place, but outlook. These are people convinced they are multicultural and cosmopolitan, while limiting themselves to a parochial social circle. They are conventional people who labour under the delusion they are rebellious. They embrace their status while simultaneously denying it, so as to appear empathetic, sometimes casting themselves as the privileged poor. They support the Lib Dems because the Tories are too crass, Reform is too common and Labour is too costly.
I’ve witnessed an elderly Lib Dem devotee, who lives in a house large enough to warrant a tour guide, declare that he and his wife would not be able to eat if they didn’t sell up within two years. He also owned rental homes and bought his children homes to rent to others, with inherited family money. A lady who lunches, who admitted to a crush on former party leader Nick Clegg, revealed tearfully: ‘I felt physical pain when the Brexit result came through, because my children wouldn’t be able to travel through Europe as I had.’ Her children were at the local private school, even though she disapproved of private education. ‘They would not have survived at state school.’ After attending university, and enjoying a stint in London, their children return to this territory as adults, to become parents, to become the next generation of Liberal Democrat supporters.
In recent months, the party unity that brought a smile to the Lib Dem leader’s face has begun to fragment. There are rumours of dissent in the ranks due to Davey’s failure to capitalise on the anger the electorate harbours for the Labour government. This ‘frustration’ was confirmed when Politics UK quoted one disenchanted MP: ‘Reform [is] assuming a place in the national debate, and so are the Greens. We are content to not do this. And it isn’t good enough.’ Anticipating that this unrest could fester, Davey took himself away from Thorpe Park and Alton Towers to present himself as a political player on the world stage. Yet the statements he issues to give himself gravitas, consisting in the main of anti-Trump posturing, are as empty as the stunts and pratfalls at theme parks – and, ultimately, have as little impact.
Last year, Davey announced he would be boycotting a state banquet for President Trump, as a stand against his response to the crisis in Gaza. Tapping into the student slogans then (and still) doing the rounds, Davey declared that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his government were responsible for ‘genocide’. Playing to the same raggedy crowd, he demanded the recognition of a Palestinian state.
Presently, Elon Musk is as much of a folk devil as Trump for the likes of Davey. He accused the X owner of meddling in democracy and inciting far-right violence during the Unite the Kingdom march – an event that angered Davey and his tribe as much as the Brexit vote. Playing David to Musk’s Goliath, he suggests ‘Tesla tariffs’ to hit him where it hurts, and prosecuting him under the Online Safety Act for allowing material that shows child abuse and self-harm on X. This from the leader who advised his party to abstain in a parliamentary vote on a national inquiry into the rape gangs and the efforts to cover up their crimes.
As part of the 2024 General Election campaign, Ed Davey rides a rollercoaster at Thorpe Park, 10 June 2024.
When it comes to issues such as Brexit, Davey’s reaction is extreme. He proposes building bridges with the EU that would eliminate the result. Yet his party claims to be the ‘moderate’ voice absent in British politics. Supposedly, the Lib Dems are the ‘progressive’ response to the ‘populism’ of Nigel Farage and Reform UK, which he believes adheres to Trumpian politics and an American-style ‘right wing’ fervour, compared with the ‘British values’ and ‘patriotism’ the Lib Dems represent. This is clearly a recent development, given his party previously talked of ‘patriotism’ much as Labour MPs and student activists did – that is, as synonymous with ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’. The pratfalls of Davey pale into insignificance when compared with former leader Tim Farron draping himself in the Union Jack at the party’s autumn 2025 conference in Bournemouth – an event as white as Glastonbury, so white in fact it might alarm Jon Snow. The Lib Dem supporters and MPs indulging in this tragic spectacle, like those at the Labour Party conference attempting something similar with the various flags of the United Kingdom, had everyone else cringing at the comic desperation of it.
Davey and the current crop of Lib Dem MPs are neither genuinely progressive people nor serious politicians, but they emerged from parties that included figures that were. The high watermark of the Liberal Party in the 20th century was the years in government, 1906 to 1915, during which the ‘New Liberalism’ introduced the welfare reforms that successive Labour governments built on. The Liberals’ fortunes changed with their merger with the Social Democratic Party in 1988, the party founded seven years prior by the Gang of Four. These were the veteran Labour MPs who left the party as it began to prioritise the left-wing fringe issues that would eventually define its ideology – a process that would ultimately alienate working-class supporters and transform it into the party of the middle class that it is today.
During the period the Lib Dems found themselves in government, between 2010 and 2015, in an unholy alliance with the Conservatives, they were criticised by their own side at the time for reneging on abolishing student tuition fees. In the years since, it’s the negligence of Ed Davey as minister for postal affairs during the Post Office and Horizon IT scandal that has drawn criticism from elsewhere. When the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office returned the story to the headlines in January 2024, Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson posted on X:
‘Ed Davey was paid £833 an hour – over £220,000 in total – to advise lawyers who were acting for the Post Office. (Taking taxpayers’ money to persecute petrified, innocent people.) As postal-affairs minister, Davey refused to believe Alan Bates about Post Office bullying. But happy to jump into the trough after.’
Davey’s knack for jumping on a bandwagon just as it’s leaving town has become evident since he took the helm of the party. He replaced Jo Swinson, the first female leader of the Liberal Democrats, who defeated him in the previous leadership challenge. Swinson put a smile on all our faces when her image appeared on the promotional leaflets during the 2019 campaign, arriving through the letterbox among the pizza flyers, with the declaration that we were looking at ‘Britain’s next prime minister’.
The brash declarations Davey now peddles are as performative as the indignation his fellow MPs express when rising to their feet in the House of Commons. This is notable among the party’s female MPs. Last October, deputy leader Daisy Cooper aired her indignation, and shared her limited insight, on a subject outside the echo chamber in which Liberal Democrat MPs exist: Tommy Robinson. She demanded the current prime minister direct the security services to evaluate the threat that Elon Musk ‘poses to our democracy’ for giving Robinson legal support (he had just been charged under the Terrorism Act in 2024 for refusing to give police his phone password, and was subsequently acquitted). In April 2025, the diminutive West Country Lib Dem MP, Tessa Munt, made similar demands, shrinking behind huge dark glasses – she’s sensitive to the harsh lights in the chamber – that would have dwarfed Anna Wintour.
Munt lives in Wedmore and represents Wells. In the country at weekends, at a Saturday surgery, or at hedgehog farms that feature on Facebook posts, she sports an archaic Sloane Ranger look of cashmere crew neck, a polo shirt with the collar raised, jeans, Chelsea boots and pearls. Munt, rightfully and nobly, supports local farmers and addresses their current grievances, but doesn’t extend this to the victims of grooming gangs. This was evident in her contribution to a cross-party Commons debate, in response to a contribution from Conservative MP Katie Lam.
Opening a moving, heartfelt speech, Lam addressed the need for an inquiry into the rape gangs, highlighting the racial and religious aspects that contributed to these crimes. She said: ‘One of the victims from Dewsbury was told by her rapist: “We’re here to fuck all the white girls and fuck the government.”’ Lam spoke graphically about the violence the victims had suffered, informing the few figures present in the commons, the language was necessary because ‘We must not look away or sanitise this evil’.
She quoted the sentencing remarks of judge Peter Rook, who gave Mohammed Karrar of Oxford life in prison:
‘You prepared her [his victim, a 13-year-old girl] for gang anal rape by using a pump to expand her anal passage. You subjected her to gang rape by five or six men. At one point she had four men inside her. A red ball was placed in her mouth to keep her quiet… When she was 12, after raping her, she threatened you with your lock knife. Your reaction was to pick up a baseball bat with a silver metal handle, strike her on the head with it, and then insert the baseball bat inside her vagina.’
Lam concluded:
‘This is not about me, the minister, the home secretary or any honourable members in the chamber; it is about the little girls, up and down our country, whose brutal and repeated rapes were permitted and hidden by those in the British state whose jobs were to protect them.’
Responding to Lam, Munt made the issue about herself, and sanitised this evil in the process. ‘My blood is boiling as I listen to the stuff coming from Conservative members’, she said, playing to the gallery. ‘If they had read the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, they would recognise that there are hundreds of thousands of people alive today – people just like me, white girls – who suffered at the hands of white men who have got clean away with it, because nothing was done for so long.’ As Madeline Grant wrote in her Telegraph column at the time: ‘Belittling the unspeakable abuse of thousands of girls as “stuff” is bad enough; even worse to do so from the comfort of places where the realities of “community tension” are scarcely felt.’
In essence, here is the sinister undertow that lies beneath the ‘moderate’ veneer of the Liberal Democrats. The contempt they harbour for those outside their bubble, with a different experience and a different outlook, who now support Reform, is no different to that expressed by hysterical protesters with blue hair and placards, putting their weight behind Your Party or the Greens. The difference being the provincial middle-class Lib Dem devotees come with hand-knitted scarves, Hunter wellies, Barbour jackets, Amnesty tote bags, and pearls. They carry their Fitzcarraldo Editions to coffee shops for effect, but read Cormoran Strike novels in book groups. They would rather defend the BBC than defund it. They listen to The Last Dinner Party.
The UK political party these people loyally support is not currently a real threat, but it could become one. And Ed Davey could still be leading the Liberal Democrats and in the running, garnering support from disgruntled Labour moderates and Tory wets. At which point the smile on that fatuous face will widen. To the rest of us, Davey will still be the joke he’s always been. But the joke won’t be funny anymore.
Expert comment provided by licensed sexologist, relationship therapist, and author at Passionerad, Sofie Roos.
Previously, we heard from sexologist and relationship therapist Sofie Roos about what straight men and straight women bring up the most in sex therapy.
And this week, she spoke to us about the topics virgins over 30 discuss most with her.
1) Performance anxiety and not knowing “what to do”
“Many people over 30 who’re still virgins… [talk to me] about performance anxiety… they often worry about not knowing what to do during sex, that they will mess up, or that it will get awkward,” Roos said.
Other common fears include being judged by your partner and not having the supposed “right” physical responses to sex and foreplay.
This stress, the sexologist said, can sometimes create a vicious cycle. “These kinds of worries easily lead to the physical reactions they’re afraid of, such as erection problems, difficulties with getting wet, or having a hard time relaxing.”
2) Feelings of shame and feeling “behind”
Because society often has “norms for when we should have sex the first time,” Roos said, some virgins aged 30 and over feel they’re behind or “as if something is wrong with you, even though it most often isn’t”.
It can make communication with partners and even dating feel more difficult, she added.
3) Worries about their desirability and low sexual self-esteem
Some in this group “develop doubts about their ability to attract, or their desirability as a romantic partner,” the therapist told us.
“Even though there’s absolutely nothing wrong with you,” she said, those who haven’t lost their virginity at 30 or older can “see themselves as less appealing and capable in intimate situations than what they actually are”.
And it’s not uncommon for people to “grow an insecurity around flirting, intimacy and emotional closeness, making many of the natural elements in finding a partner feel too overwhelming,” she added.
4) Fear of pain
Pain during penetration is a relatively common concern for straight women, Roos told us last week. And for virgins aged 30 and over, she told us many are afraid of “pain during sex, which just increases the risk for unpleasant intimacy, especially in women.
“For people with vulvas, being afraid of pain during penetration can lead to difficulties with relaxing and getting wet, making the sex unpleasant,” she added.
And for men, “worrying can cause temporary erection problems, which also tend to put people in a very negative loop where having sex becomes something that feels more and more difficult each time you try”.
So… any advice?
Roos had some words of wisdom for people in this group, starting with destigmatising being a virgin after 30.
“There’s no deadline for when you should have sex for the first time – it’s all about what feels right for you! It’s normal to have your sex debut early, and it’s normal to have it late, and at what age you first get intimate says extremely little about how the rest of your sex life will be,” she said.
She also said that sometimes, those who feel they’re “late” to having sex can put a premium on experience, even at the cost of pleasure. But she thinks it’s healthier to stay present, start as slow as you like, and communicate.
“Start with kisses and just being close, and then take it from there at the tempo you enjoy, and focus on how it feels and on the moment instead of on what you’re doing, something that builds safety and makes it feel way better”.
Roos also says many virgins over 30 are “scared about telling the person they’re seeing that they never have had sex before, but in my experience, a date often responds with way more understanding and empathy than we expect.”
Explaining where you’re at sexually can make further communication easier.
You should also learn “what feels good, both physically, emotionally and mentally” – that “makes sexual encounters feel more welcoming, safe and less mystical, which is key for taking that step”.
Lastly, the sexologist said, don’t be afraid of seeking expert help, or even talking to a friend, if you need. That’s “extremely valuable if the fear, shame and anxiety are strong and difficult to deal with on your own”.
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.
When I was in secondary school, matte lips were everything.
Whether you were part of the crowd who put foundation on their lips and called it a day or not; everyone could agree that a great, statement matte lip was a very powerful thing.
But, as with so many things that are hugely popular when you’re a teen, it’s easy to develop a knee-jerk aversion to it when you’re an adult.
This is what happened to me, dear reader. Around the time I got to university, I turned my back on bold matte lipsticks in favour of, well, virtually everything else, and haven’t looked back since.
Well… That is, until now.
On a whim, I decided to try the Lip & Cheek Blurry Pudding Pot by South Korean brand Fwee, in shade Boss (one of the darkest colours available, naturally).
I was tempted by the fact it’s a lip and cheek duo. Even though I rarely go bold with my blush, I get way too much satisfaction from a perfectly matching cheek-and-lip combo.
Boots
Widespread love of K-Beauty isn’t new – and I’m certainly not immune to the hype. In fact, according to the Boots Beauty & Wellness Trends Report for 2026, one K-Beauty product sells every 11 seconds at Boots.
But when it comes to this little pot, the hype is very much warranted.
In fact, I’d go so far as saying that it’s got me feeling a way about matte lips that I haven’t felt since Kylie Jenner had blue hair.
Sure, I dabbled with Glossier’s Generation G just like every other millennial makeup wearer in the world, but that was semi-sheer and a lot more subtle. This is a very different level of pigment.
The first time I popped this pudding on my lips and cheeks, I put it to the test over dinner.
I didn’t top it up once over the course of the meal, and was pleasantly surprised to find that it hadn’t budged an inch while I’d been eating and drinking.
While you want to make sure your lips are in a moisturised, non-flaky state when you put it on (it clings to the cracks as you might expect), I’ve found that this lippy is also super comfortable to wear and non-drying, which is a very far cry from lots of the other matte lip products out there.
Heaven help you if you put it on and change your mind, though! Even when I tried to take it off, a lighter shade of berry lingered.
It’s super easy to apply to the lips – I just used my fingers and blurred out the edges a little for a softer look.
The main drawback is that it’s harder to get the cheeks just right with a colour this big and bold.
I’ve been using a brush to make blending easier, but the balance between too much and too little is a very fine one. For me, striking that balance is still a work in progress.
All in all, however, at £16, the Fwee Lip & Cheek Blurry Pudding Pot is an utter bargain. I’ll be popping at least five more shades on my wishlist.
4 min read
There is concern within the Liberal Democrats that some of their MPs could defect to the Greens amid restlessness over the direction of the party.
A senior Liberal Democrat MP told PoliticsHome that at least two Lib Dem MPs — both representing traditionally Conservative constituencies in southern England captured during the party’s 2024 surge — could be tempted to switch to Zack Polanski’s party.
Ed Davey led the Lib Dems to a record 72 seats at the last general election, which made them the third biggest party in the House of Commons. Their gains came largely at the expense of Tories in so-called ‘blue wall’ parts of the country.
Since then, however, there has been growing disquiet within the parliamentary party, with Lib Dem MPs privately questioning the strategic direction and complaining that they have failed to capitalise on the success of 2024.
This restlessness has been fuelled by Polanski’s Greens overtaking the Lib Dems in recent polls. Polanski, previously a Lib Dem, has been credited with sharpening the Greens’ message and expanding their appeal beyond traditional environmental voters.
YouGov this week put the Liberal Democrats in fifth place nationally on 14 per cent, trailing behind Reform, the Conservatives, the Greens and Labour.
“Ed is the most successful leader the party has ever had. He’s won more MPs than ever before, and has a story that genuinely connects with the public. But he’s lost all momentum,” one Lib Dem MP told PoliticsHome.
The same MP added: “There’s a huge opportunity in the centre for the Lib Dems. Ed’s team needs to stop holding back now and really go for it. Otherwise, we’ll just disappear.”
“Everyone’s frustrated,” added a different Lib Dem MP.
Davey has made opposition to Donald Trump a key part of his political agenda, regularly calling on the Labour government to be firmer with the US President.
Internal plans obtained by The Spectator reveal a belief among Lib Dem strategists that their strong opposition to US strikes on Iran will pay dividends at the 7 May local elections.
One memo leaked to the publication reads: “For the first time since the Iraq war… we have a chance to turn a distinctive and principled Liberal Democrat position on foreign affairs into significant election gains.”
However, critical Lib Dems MPs say that, beyond their position on the Trump administration, a lack of a clear policy platform is leaving them with little to talk about.
A Green Party Source told PoliticsHome: “Zack has made it clear that his door is open to anyone who shares the Green Party’s values – but right now he is focused on electing a wave of green councillors, mayors and Sennedd members in May.”
As the party gets together for its spring conference in York this weekend, MPs are starting to wonder whether Davey, who has been Lib Dem leader since 2020, is the right person to lead the party into the next general election.
However, as things stand, there is no sense that his position is under serious threat, nor that there is an obvious successor.
The party’s deputy leader, Daisy Cooper, former leadership contender, Layla Moran, and party president, Josh Babarinde, elected in 2024, are names mentioned by MPs as potential future leaders.
In a recent interview with The House magazine, the Liberal Democrat MP Roz Savage hinted at her own frustrations when asked whether Davey remained the best person to lead the party.
“I can’t say anything about that on the record,” she replied.
One of her colleagues told PoliticsHome: “It’s what everyone’s thinking, she’s just the first to say something publicly.”
Lisa Smart, the Lib Dem MP for Hazel Grove, who is helping devise party strategy, urged colleagues to get behind their leader.
“Ed is the most popular party leader in the country and the strongest voice in Parliament when it comes to standing up to Donald Trump or building closer ties with Europe,” she told PoliticsHome.
“Of course, we have a big bit of work to do coming up with bold new policies as we get closer to the next election, and I’m really proud of all my Liberal Democrat colleagues working hard to do that.”
She added: We are focused on winning, because that’s how we stop Reform, elect more Liberal Democrat MPs and change the country. We have a huge opportunity to win more seats, but also a duty to stop Nigel Farage getting anywhere near Number 10.”
One of the strategic questions facing the Lib Dems is what political direction to pursue as part of their bid to build on their success at the 2024 general election.
There are some MPs, like Savage, who describe themselves as being on the left of the party.
However, there are those who believe the party should continue prioritising former Conservative voters through more centre-right positions on issues like fiscal responsibility.
“We need to be making the case to Conservative voters that we can be trusted on the economy or they won’t vote for us,” said one Lib Dem MP.
Ahead of Sunday night’s ceremony, some of Hollywood’s most recognisable faces will be gearing up to find out if they’ve snagged one of those coveted golden statues.
Others, though, weren’t quite so lucky.
Indeed, there are some pretty note-worthy absentees from this year’s Oscars shortlist – while there are a fair few others we were no doubt pleasantly surprised to see make their way into their categories.
Here are our seven biggest snubs and surprises of the 2026 Oscar nominees…
SNUB
Let’s start with the biggie, shall we?
In 2025, the first Wicked movie racked up a hefty 10 Oscar nominations, including acting wins for both Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, and wins in the Best Production Design and Best Costume Design categories.
However, neither actor has been recognised at this year’s event – and, in fact, Wicked: For Good failed to pick up a single Oscar nomination in something of a blow for the musical sequel.
Worst of all, without a nod in the Best Original Song category, we were subjected to those new additions to the soundtrack for nothing…
SNUB
Chase Infiniti (One Battle After Another)
One Battle After Another, remarkably, marked Chase Infiniti’s first time on the big screen, with her performance in the Paul Thomas Anderson movie earning her nominations at both the Golden Globes, Critics’ Choice Awards, Baftas and recently-renamed Actor Awards.
Surprisingly – and, we have to say, disappointingly – this did not translate to an Oscar nomination for the young star, who will next be seen in Niki Byrne’s coming-of-age drama The Julia Set.
SNUB
Paul Mescal (Best Supporting Actor)
As expected, Hamnet had plenty of love when it came to this year’s Oscar nominations, with lead actor Jessie Buckley the current favourite to scoop Best Actress and Chloe Zhao receiving Best Picture, Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay nods.
While many expected that Paul Mescal would rack up his second nomination for his performance as William Shakespeare, it turned out there was not enough room for him in the stacked category after all.
SURPRISE
Kate Hudson (Best Actress)
As the date of the Oscar nominations announcement drew nearer, we’d heard rumblings that Kate Hudson might make her way into the Best Actress category, but we weren’t sure whether she’d actually manage it.
Kate plays tribute singer Claire Sardina in the musical drama, earning her first Oscar nomination in 25 years for her work in the movie (she was last nominated in 2001 for her breakout role in Almost Famous).
SURPRISE
Delroy Lindo (Best Supporting Actor)
After Delroy Lindo was overlooked at the Golden Globes, Critics’ Choice Awards and Actor Awards for his performance as Delta Slim in Sinners, we came to the sad conclusion that the comic relief character wouldn’t be getting any love from the major awards bodies this year.
Imagine our delight, then, when he managed to make his way into the Best Supporting Actor category at the Oscars, one of three acting nods for the film (which has shattered the record for the most nominations in history) at the upcoming Academy Awards.
SURPRISE
Amy Madigan (Best Supporting Actress)
To be fair, after winning a Critics’ Choice Award and earning recognition at the Golden Globes, we’re not sure we can really call Amy Madigan’s nomination for her performance in Weapons a surprise anymore.
Still, when we cast our mind back to the first time we were introduced to Aunt Gladys last year, we never thought that Amy would land herself in the running for an Oscar for her role, and given the Academy’s history with horror movies, it’s great to see her getting the recognition she deserves so much.
SNUB
Like Wicked: For Good, many were shocked that Park Chan-wook’s satirical drama No Other Choice didn’t get a single Oscar nomination – despite its acclaim from both critics and audiences, and the fact that until recently it held a rare 100% score on Rotten Tomatoes.
What we’re hoping is that the conversation around this snub, paired with its rave reviews, are enough that when it hits UK cinemas later this week, audiences flood to see it.
When One Piece debuted in 2023, it quickly was hailed as one of the best live-action adaptations of a manga ever, and became the Netflix’s most-watched original series of the second half of that year.
After an agonising three-year wait, Monkey D. Luffy, Nami, Roronoa Zoro and the rest of the super-powered team of pirates are back in action – alongside a new ragtag group of enemies, allies and magical creatures.
Here are all the new actors joining One Piece in its second season, and a quick guide to where you might know them from…
Charithra Chandran
Charitha has joined the second series of One Piece as Miss Wednesday, the princess of the desert kingdom Alabasta.
The British actor is no stranger to popular Netflix shows, having played Edwina in the second series of Bridgerton.
After her big break in the Amazon Prime adaptation of the Alex Ryder books in 2021, playing Sabina Pleasance, Charitha went on to appear in Dune: Prophecy as a younger version of Tabu’s character Francesca.
On the big screen, you may recognise her for her performance as the flight attendant in Josh Hartnett’s action film Fight Or Flight, and in the recent festive film Christmas Karma, which co-starred Kunal Nayyar and Danny Dyer.
Mikaela Hoover
Season two of One Piece also welcomes Mikaela Hoover to the cast, who voices the talkative reindeer Tony Tony Chopper.
You’ll likely recognise her for her recent role in Superman, in which she plays journalist Cat Grant.
The superhero movie marked her latest collaboration with director James Gunn, having played Nova Prime’s assistant in Guardians Of The Galaxy, voiced Floor the Rabbit in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 and appeared as the president’s assistant, Camila, in The Suicide Squad.
She has also had guest roles in Charlie Sheen’s comedy Anger Management, 2 Broke Girls alongside Kat Dennings and in last year’s TV crime thriller Duster.
You can next see Mikaela in the second season of Netflix’s Beef, which also features Oscar Isaac and Carey Mulligan.
David Dastmalchian
Zade Rosenthal/Marvel Studios/Walt Disney Studios/Kobal/Shutterstock
David Dastmalchian appears as Mr. 3, the Baroque Works member who can produce candle wax from his hands.
A well-known face to fans of sci-fi and comic book adaptations, David played Kurt in the Ant-Man films, Polka Dot Man in The Suicide Squad and voiced Julian Day in the recent Batman animated films.
Following his big-screen debut in The Dark Knight, playing Joker’s deranged henchman, David teamed up again with director Christopher Nolan in 2024, taking on the role of real-life lawyer William L. Borden in Oppenheimer.
You may also recognise him for his role in Dune as Piter De Vries, the assistant to Stellan Skarsgård’s Baron Vladimir Harkonnen, and for starring in horror, Late Night With The Devil.
On TV, he appeared in the 2017 series of Twin Peaks as Pit Boss Warrick, Dexter: Resurrection as the Gemini killer and all 10 episodes of Apple TV’s eccentric sci-fi series Murderbot.
Katey Sagal
Aaron Rapoport/Corbis/Getty Images/Fox
Katey Sagal, who plays Dr. Kureha in the manga adaptation, is a veritable TV icon.
She is known for playing Peg Bundy on the sitcom Married… With Children and, more recently, starring in Sons Of Anarchy as matriarch Gemma Teller Morrow.
Her other credits include voicing Leela in Futurama, having a leading role in the family sitcom 8 Simple Rules, and playing Dan’s second wife in the TV sitcom The Conners.
Most recently, you might have seen Katey play Nora’s mother in Tell Me Lies, appear in former Married… With Children co-star Christina Applegate’s comedy/drama Dead To Me or star alongside Sophie Turner in the horror film Trust.
Mark Harelik
Mark Harelik appears in One Piece as another of the doctors on Drum Island.
The actor and playwright has been consistently working since making his TV debut in Wings in 1993.
On the big screen, his long and varied career includes Election with Reese Witherspoon, Jurassic Park III and 2017’s Battle Of The Sexes, starring as real-life baseball player Hank Greenberg.
As for his TV work, he played the head of the physics department in The Big Bang Theory, God in Amazon Prime’s Preacher and most recently worked with Jake Gyllenhaal in Apple TV+ drama Presumed Innocent.
Callum Kerr
Callum Kerr has a supporting role in the second series of One Piece, playing a Marine Captain who can turn into smoke.
The Scottish actor and country singer found fame playing George Kiss in Hollyoaks between 2020 and 2021, before joining the cast of the musical drama show Monarch, acting alongside Susan Sarandon and Anna Friel.
He later played the young Everett in Virgin River, and starred as Galad Trakand in season three of The Wheel Of Time.
You might also recognise Callum for his appearance in Robbie Williams ’ video for his 2017 single Mixed Signals.
Camrus Johnson
Camrus Johnson, who plays Mr. 5, is most likely recognisable for his role as Luke Fox in the TV series Batwoman, in which he acted alongside Ruby Rose.
His first big role came when he played Omar Hassabala in the 2019 teen romance movie The Sun Is Also A Star.
One Piece is his latest Netflix collaboration, having also appeared in two episodes of Luke Cage and played a supporting role as Corporal Carson in Millie Bobby Brown’s streaming blockbuster The Electric State.
Julia Rehwald
Julia Rehwald appears as Smoker’s subordinate in One Piece. She, too, is a well-known face to Netflix audiences, after being hailed as one of the most exciting scream queens currently working after starring as Kate Schmidt in the Fear Street trilogy.
Star Wars fans, meanwhile, will know her for voicing Celesta Kami in the recent animated series Young Jedi Adventures.
Rigo Sanchez
Byron Cohen/ABC/Getty Images
Rigo plays the leader of the Revolutionary Army in One Piece, but you may better recognise him as Lightner, the mercenary villain introduced in season four of Outer Banks.
The actor also starred in the Animal Kingdom television show, played a firefighter in the Grey’s Anatomy spin-off Station 19 and recently appeared in an episode of Duster.
Daniel Lasker
Zimbabwean actor Daniel Lasker, who plays Mr. 9 in One Piece, is best known for his performance as Furfur in the sci-fi show Raised By Wolves.
His other TV credits include appearing in BBC drama Our Girl as a US soldier, and playing Merrick in the recent adaptation of Mallory Blackman’s Noughts + Crosses.
On the big screen, Daniel recently starred alongside Josh Duhamel and Aidan Gillen in London Calling.
Sophia Anne Caruso
Helen Sloan/SMPSP/Netflix
Sophia Anne Caruso stars in One Piece as Miss Goldenweek, a character who can alter people’s emotions using paint.
She is a recognisable face in the world of theatre, originating the role of Lydia Deetz in the Broadway musical adaptation of Beetlejuice.
On screen, Sophia appeared in Paul Feig’s fantasy The School For Good And Evil alongside Charlize Theron and Kerry Washington.
Rob Colletti
Rob Colletti plays the tyrannic ruler of the Drum Kingdom in One Piece.
Although more famous for his stage work, including originating the role of Dewey Finn in Broadways’ School Of Rock, he also had a small part in 2021′s The Sopranos prequel, The Many Saints Of Newark.
Watch seasons one and two of One Piece and Netflix now.
Woman charged to court after assault on bus driver in Derry
Taylor Swift’s $2 Billion Fortune and Wedding Buzz Dominate Headlines
Hulu’s 10/10 Bingeworthy Sci-Fi Masterpiece Is Eerily Similar to Rebecca Ferguson’s ‘Silo’
Smart energy pays enters the US market, targeting scalable financial infrastructure
Why Israel is blocking foreign journalists from entering
Bitcoin: We’re Entering The Most Dangerous Phase
Cost-Push Inflation #finance #financialeducation #inflation #investing
cash is your resource#learningwithease#financial literacytoall
Crypto Gold Live Trading| 13 MARCH #vinbullindia #livetrading #vinbulllive #live #trading
-
Tech3 days agoA 1,300-Pound NASA Spacecraft To Re-Enter Earth’s Atmosphere
-
News Videos5 days ago10th Algebra | Financial Planning | Question Bank Solution | Board Exam 2026
-
Crypto World5 days agoParadigm, a16z, Winklevoss Capital, Balaji Srinivasan among investors in ZODL
-
Business4 days agoExxonMobil seeks to move corporate registration from New Jersey to Texas
-
Crypto World9 hours agoHYPE Token Enters Net Deflation as HyperCore Buybacks Outpace Staking Rewards
-
Fashion20 hours agoWeekend Open Thread: Addict Lip Glow
-
Tech4 days agoChatGPT will now generate interactive visuals to help you with math and science concepts
-
Sports7 days agoThree share 2-shot lead entering final round in Hong Kong
-
Sports6 days agoBraveheart Lakshya downs Lai in epic battle to enter All England Open final | Other Sports News
-
NewsBeat3 days agoResidents reaction as Shildon murder probe enters second day
-
Business6 days agoSearch for Nancy Guthrie Enters 37th Day as FBI Probes Wi-Fi Jammer Theory
-
Business3 days agoSearch Enters Sixth Week With New Leads in Tucson Abduction Case
-
NewsBeat5 days agoPagazzi Lighting enters administration as 70 jobs lost and 11 stores close across Scotland
-
Tech5 days agoDespite challenges, Ireland sixth in EU for board gender diversity
-
Business5 days agoSearch Enters 39th Day with FBI Tip Line Developments and No Major Breakthroughs
-
NewsBeat3 days agoI Entered The Manosphere. Nothing Could Prepare Me For What I Found.
-
Sports5 days agoSkateboarding World Championships: Britain’s Sky Brown wins park gold
-
Crypto World4 days agoWill Chainlink price reclaim $10 amid volatility squeeze?
-
Business1 hour agoCountry star Brantley Gilbert enters growing non-alcoholic beer market
-
Sports3 days agoPWHL, Senators discussing plan to keep Charge in Ottawa