Danny Kruger (Photography by Tom Pilston for The House)

13 min read21 min

A mop of grey hair can be seen bobbing over boxes piled high in a room with walls stripped bare, leaving only hooks missing their pictures. As a pair of podcast hosts stumble out, we shuffle in. Danny Kruger is being kicked out of his parliamentary office.

The Reform MP for East Wiltshire is likely destined for a pokier alternative, somewhere harder to find on the estate. This is his belated punishment, handed down by the whips, for defecting from the Conservatives in September to Nigel Farage’s insurgent party. He was the first sitting MP to make the big leap.

Now tasked with heading up Reform UK’s preparations for government, Kruger says he has “the most exciting job it’s possible to be doing in politics”. So, if there were a general election tomorrow, would his party be ready to govern?

“We’ll be ready when we have to be. There’s not going to be a general election tomorrow,” he replies. “We are getting ready at pace. I would like more time, because I think we will benefit from having our ideas kicked around by more people with expertise.”

With characteristic impishness, he summarises: “The answer to your question is, we’ll be ready when we have to be, but we’ll be readier the later it is.”

His own attention is geared towards the Civil Service, which will see a major headcount reduction under Reform plans. Kruger sets out a private sector-style vision: more people brought in from the outside; ‘high-flyers’ better-paid, with a performance-related element; some recruited for short periods, say six months, to work on a specific task.

Reform will prioritise “people with actual domain expertise” over “these posh generalists who float about from department to department making policy at the moment”, says the Eton-educated MP some would describe as a posh generalist himself.

“A lot of change is coming. Yes, more political appointees, whether they’re spads or civil servants, and a culture which prioritises delivery and genuine subject matter expertise.”

Would his party work with the new cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, dubbed “queen of woke” by some conservatives?

“I’m not going to get into individuals, although it’s true to say we are looking at individuals to see who in the current system we expect to work successfully with,” Kruger says. “To get to the top of the Civil Service, it’s quite a bad sign, really. You would have had to really conform to a very, very strict orthodoxy of belief and practice.”

Asked whether a clear-out will therefore be required, he says he is consulting with current and former civil servants to spot talent – or lack thereof – among permanent secretaries (perm secs) and director-generals (DGs).

“Sometimes name me names – ‘Who do you think is good and bad?’ – but mostly, ‘What proportion of the senior civil service, the top 200 perm secs, DGs, do you rate?’” Their answers are “depressing”, he reports.

So, what proportion of the current crop do they categorise as “good”? Kruger spots a journalist’s trap and refuses to give a percentage. “But it’s bad,” he adds.

This all sounds very Dominic Cummings, the former chief of staff to Boris Johnson, and an old friend of Kruger. The prospect of him joining the project is dismissed, however.

“I don’t think there’s any chance of Dominic coming on board. Neither does he want to, nor would Nigel have him. I think he’s put himself out of consideration for direct work in government,” Kruger says.

“I don’t talk to him much because he’s not in the Reform camp, but I read his stuff, and I’ve always thought he was wise and prescient.”

Cummings has warned that Britain is sliding towards civil war, claiming that we are “only random viral posts away from riots and prairie fires getting out of control”. Does Kruger agree?

“Yeah,” he replies. The left portrays Reform as “rabble-rousers” who incite division, which could become violence. “The total opposite is the case. The only chance of unity for our country is Reform,” the MP continues. “If we don’t win, or if we win and then make a mess of it, I do fear for our country.”

Life as a small-c conservative has been a pain of late, including under recent Tory administrations. “We fight the long defeat, as Tolkien said. We’re always losing,” as Kruger puts it.

Yet he fully believes that the winds are changing now. The mood of the country has shifted, and those in power, still embracing “the cult of the independent individual” without “any obligations beyond self-gratification”, are lagging behind.

“We’re all realising how empty that philosophy is and how destructive it is of society,” he says. “The Reform slogan is family, community, country. We’re talking about the associations that give us meaning and identity and security and a sense of belonging. I think that’s where the country is now going – away from a doctrine of total liberal individualism.”

“I’ve been hoping for a return to IDS all these years, but I found that in Nigel – he is my IDS”

Advertisement

Kruger, 51, made his start in politics at the Centre for Policy Studies think tank and then as an adviser in the Conservative Party’s policy unit, initially under Iain Duncan Smith. After a stint as the Telegraph’s chief leader writer, he started writing David Cameron’s speeches – including, most memorably, the “hug-a-hoodie” one. He insists his politics have not budged over the years, however.

“I remain quite proud of that speech,” he says, explaining that it was actually very conservative, advocating proper punishment of criminals as well as love for young people at risk of crime. (His embrace of words like “love” is not unusual for politicians driven by their faith – Kruger became a Christian in his 20s, after meeting his wife, Emma – and should not be mistaken for softness of politics.) He left Cameron in 2008 to work full-time on the youth crime prevention charity he co-founded.

“I’ve always been a social conservative. The bits of Cameronism that I approved of, like the Big Society, I still approve of. I was always a Brexiteer.”

He is “probably less of a neocon”, though: “I supported the Iraq War – I regret that.” He regrets, too, supporting parts of the Covid response before later becoming a strong lockdown critic.

“I was the token right-winger in the Cameron team. I was probably most at home, in all of these Tory leaders I worked for, with IDS, in the 2003 era. So, I’ve been hoping for a return to IDS all these years, but I found that in Nigel – he is my IDS.”

Kruger has been prominent over the last year not only because of his defection but also his opposition to assisted dying.

“My expectation is that they’re going to run out of time,” he says of Kim Leadbeater’s bill currently before Parliament. “While I oppose the bill, and I will oppose any assisted dying bill because I don’t think it’s possible to craft a safe one, you could craft a much safer one than this.” He does not accept that peers have been filibustering to kill the bill.

Kruger’s mother, Bake Off star Prue Leith, has been one of the celebrities at the fore of the pro-assisted dying campaign. They made a documentary together about the subject, through which they came to better understand each other’s views.

“It’s been a bit difficult sometimes, because it matters a lot to both of us, and we haven’t been prepared to stop. She’s committed to the campaign; I’m committed to resisting it. But, no, overwhelmingly, I salute my mum for not minding that I am leading, or one of the leaders of, the campaign to stop her getting her way,” he says. “Neither of us is budging. That’s OK.”

The other big social reform put before MPs recently was the decriminalisation of abortion at any point during pregnancy, via an amendment by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi. Unlike the assisted dying legislation, it passed the Commons easily.

“I thought it was a real shame that we did that – as a country, as a Parliament. Again, totally understand the argument for it, but it has sent a very, very strong signal that it is acceptable to abort a viable baby at nine months,” Kruger says. He also argues it has put vulnerable women at further risk of coercion by abusive partners. (Advocates of decriminalisation naturally disagree on both points.)

“The fact it happened the same week as the assisted dying bill just struck me as a very, very dark episode in our national life.”

In Kruger’s 2023 book Covenant, which outlines his conservative communitarian philosophy, he describes sex as being a private act done almost in public, when it should really be a public act done in private. What role does he believe a political party can have in undoing the sexual revolution, or resetting our sexual culture?

“A limited but important one,” he replies. He is clear that every government policy is “critically important to the way families form” and confirms that Reform UK is looking at switching our tax system to be based on households rather than individuals.

“Marriage traditionally was the means by which sexual relations between men and women were regulated, and I think we are suffering from having a totally unregulated sexual economy,” he says.

“I’m not interested in your love life, or anything about your personal life – that is your business. But I am interested in the framework in which you make your decisions, and I’d like the framework to be more pro-social. If you want – most people do want – to settle down with one person to have children, we should make that easier.”

While he is against the 2022 introduction of no-fault divorce, because the landmark change “basically means that your vows don’t matter”, he does not commit to overturning it. “I don’t know whether we’d be able to reverse it,” he says. “I don’t think that would be party policy, to change that.”

It may not include this one, but – with Reform UK figures concerned about our low birth rate – the party is developing a suite of fertility-boosting policies, he confirms: “Yes, we have a pronatalist ambition. We want people to have more children, and we think the government should get behind that wish.”

Expect more from Reform on childcare, for example: “Clearly, the system is totally dysfunctional. There’s a massive disincentive for parents to be able to organise their finances around their actual lives. It’s broken.”

Kruger must be serious about getting into power: he appears to position himself as less right-wing now that he has joined Reform than he did as a Tory.

Asked about his past interest in dismantling the welfare state in favour of the ‘Big Society’, he maintains that the latter was “the best aspect of the Cameron government – except the referendum, of course” and criticises welfare dependence, before pointing out that “we don’t want to dismantle the public services that people rely on”.

Is he remembering his call for “a period of creative destruction in the public services”, which forced him to stand down as a 2005 Tory candidate? “Yes, yes, I don’t want to walk into that one,” he smiles.

“Let’s not pretend otherwise: there is a clear affinity of worldview between the Maga movement and Reform”

As we discuss the British shibboleths that Reform cannot afford to be seen as having any wish to meddle with, Kruger rejects any notion of switching away from the current NHS funding model. Instead, he expands on his view that the real problem is that this country is very sick. He talks of “the principle that there’s often better alternatives than a pharmaceutical prescription or a medical treatment” – so, is he against obesity jabs?

“I’m no expert. I don’t want to wade into a debate where I don’t have the expertise – that doesn’t stop me always, but on this occasion…” Another smile. “Instinctively, I’m suspicious of a solution that seems so easy.” He is “not a caveman” and is “very pro-tech”, yet “shortcuts feel to me to be dangerous. But who am I to object?”

On the subject of Reform’s electoral vulnerabilities, The House probes Nigel Farage’s closeness with President Trump. Is that a challenge for the domestic audience?

“Clearly, Donald Trump is not wildly popular in the UK, and the fact that we have and Nigel has a personal friendship with him, might not be advantageous,” he says.

“On the other hand, I think it reflects well on Nigel that he’s stood by Donald Trump, including when Trump was down, and that relationship is very, very useful, potentially, to the United Kingdom and to a Reform government. And let’s not pretend otherwise: there is a clear affinity of worldview between the Maga movement and Reform.”

Kruger clarifies: “The US is a very different place. We don’t want to mirror their politics. We don’t want to follow everything that the current administration is doing in the UK, far from it. But the US and the Republicans are the best friends this country could have.”

The Reform MP seems genuinely comfortable in his new home. He claims not to know whether more Conservative MPs will follow suit, saying it is “a very personal decision” and “not for me to decide who Nigel would want to have anyway”.

He delivers the pitch anyway: “If you’re an authentic conservative, your patriotic duty is to join Reform – unless you’ve got some massive personal problem with some policy we’ve got, or people. But you shouldn’t.”

So, if Farage’s party forms the official opposition or government, which jobs does he have his eye on? The Department for Work and Pensions, perhaps?

“I would like to start putting in my bids for jobs now, but I won’t. Who knows what Nigel will want from each of us?” Kruger replies, acknowledging that “yeah, social policy is where I feel most expert”.

Could he be in the Cabinet Office – Reform’s Pat McFadden? “The Oliver Letwin of the operation! Again, we don’t know what the structures of government are going to be, what roles will exist, what departments we’ll have. I think there needs to be some machinery of government changes.”

The cabinet, he says, “will look smaller” and Farage has confirmed that the jobs will not all go to MPs, “so there might not be room for me”.

That would seem rather harsh, considering what a significant step he took in defecting. “I might have screwed up by then. My normal trajectory is to do something catastrophic and blow myself up. So, let’s see what I do next.”

Paddington Bear: Played by Arti Shah (on-stage performer) and James Hameed (voice/remote puppeteer) | Image by: Johan Persson

4 min read23 February

In my 50-year political career, I have sat and listened to words that moved me, uplifted me, entertained me and inspired me, but nothing quite like the words spoken in the Savoy Theatre by a three-foot bear wearing a red hat and a blue duffle coat. Even the best barn-storming political speeches are soon forgotten, and, to use an old adage, become fish-and-chip paper the following day. 

But Paddington does something that we politicians dream of being able to do: he reaches into the hearts and minds of those watching on. And he does it day after day to audiences of thousands who, judging by the performance I was lucky enough to watch, file out wiping tears from their eyes, perhaps a little changed by what they’ve just seen.

I don’t recall the books by Michael Bond having made it onto our bookshelves, so I may have been among just a handful in the audience who really didn’t know what to expect of Paddington the Musical. I vaguely knew it would be a heartfelt tale of a lost bear, but what I found was something far more profound, and oddly personal.

We politicians sometimes make the mistake of using five words when one will do, of dressing our arguments in complicated conceits, of enjoying the sound of our own voices a little too much. Paddington, on the other hand, keeps things simple. “Kindness,” as the musical tells us, “isn’t complicated.” At a time when some like to try to blame refugees, which is of course what Paddington is, for every ill imaginable it’s a message we don’t hear often enough.

There is a small part of me that will always be that person who arrived here by train knowing no one

Like Paddington, I arrived as a child at a mainline London station as a refugee with a nametag around my neck, hoping to find a way to fit into my new home and feeling somewhat out of my depth. Paddington’s journey involved crossing continents; in that sense, it mirrors the journey of many of the refugees of today rather than my own. 

But the story is at pains to remind us of the many layers of migration that have enriched our communities, embodied on stage by Mr Gruber, who we learn arrived from Hungary as a six-year-old boy (the same age I was, and one suspects for the same reason), and Tanya, whose Caribbean warmth and welcome stands in stark contrast to the officious authoritarian figure who tries to object to Paddington settling into his new home. To paraphrase this official, who carries a clipboard and blows his whistle: “You let one bear in, and they’ll all want to come.” (Who does that remind you of?)

It is Tanya, and her son Tony, who introduce another theme that runs throughout the show – a love of London borne of its diversity and tolerance. “There are so many different people in London you can always fit in.” As the cast danced on stage, across the backdrop flashed images of London’s famous sites, from Buckingham Palace to St Paul’s Cathedral, including the magnificent towers of Battersea Power Station, where many years ago I was once the MP.

Even after a life spent in the UK, most of it in London, there is a small part of me that will always be that person who arrived here by train knowing no one.

But in the Savoy Theatre, thanks to Paddington, I was reminded that my story is not to so very different from that of thousands who live here, and that’s exactly what makes me a Londoner, and proud.

Lord Dubs is a Labour peer

Paddington: The Musical

Directed by: Luke Sheppard

Original music and lyrics by: Tom Fletcher

Venue: Savoy Theatre – until February 2027

Think tank Global Trade Alert has warned that the UK is set to be one of the worst hit by a 15% tariff imposed by US President Donald Trump. After seeing his tariff-wargame shut down by the Supreme Court on Friday, Trump has responded by putting a uniform global tariff in place.

The analysis shows the proposed global tariff would be higher than the rate already agreed in the US-UK trade deal. In other words, allies of the US would pay more – while countries like China and Brazil would effectively get a discount on the rates previously applied against them.

Donald Trump’s new 15% global tariff will most greatly benefit countries he has singled out for heavy criticism, including China and Brazil. Long-standing US allies including the UK, the EU and Japan will suffer the largest hit from the new levy. https://t.co/pc8NuchWea pic.twitter.com/h6ZpbPrOr6

— Financial Times (@FT) February 22, 2026

Trump’s ego takes a knock, so retaliation must follow

We wrote on Friday about the US President’s recent setback as the Supreme Court slapped him down over his ridiculous tariff agenda:

The ruling won 6-3. It states that Trump cannot use the excuse of a national emergency to legally impose sweeping, country-specific import taxes.

It immediately invalidates the broad tariffs that Trump imposed last year on nearly all imports. This included so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on many countries, and many additional levies which Trump claimed were due to the fentanyl crisis.

This whole incident follows the Trump playbook: he didn’t get what he wanted, so it’s round two. Only this time, the fallout isn’t targeted – it’s shared. Originally stating a 10% tariff, the president changed his mind and increased it to 15%. Because at the end of the day, Trump only looks out for Trump.

As a result, countries previously targeted by the US, including Canada and Mexico, are set to see savings, while those that have aligned more closely with US interests are expected to be left facing negative consequences when the tariffs are applied.

Andy Haldane, President of the British Chamber of Commerce, told the BBC:

The perversity of what happened of the weekend was that those who got good deals, the allies, have been most disadvantaged.

However, US trade representative Jamieson Greer has insisted that trade deals negotiated with allies would still stand. According to the BBC, the UK’s trade department have been contacted for comment.

Greer told CBS on Sunday:

The deals were not premised on whether or not the emergency tariff litigation would rise or fall. These deals are going to be good deals.

We expect to stand by them. We expect our partners to stand by them.

Nevertheless, others have pointed out that this tariff is unlikely to have any legal weight behind it:

Trump CANNOT legally impose a 15% global tariff because the US doesn’t meet the clear emergency economic conditions envisioned by Section 122. If Trump tries to invoke it, it would certainly face immediate legal challenges, economic pushback, and potential congressional scrutiny. pic.twitter.com/k39Isv99Gb

— Jon Cooper 🇺🇸 (@joncoopertweets) February 21, 2026

Tariff fatigue and confusion

As our own HG wrote on Friday, the President has no qualms about throwing his weight around for his own interests and political agendas:

He has also threatened to deploy his masked ICE goons to disrupt voting – talk about a dictatorship.

Trump doesn’t like being told no – by anyone, let alone the legal system. Before the judgment, Trump said, “We’ll figure something out”. Of course, he will have no intention of following the ruling. When has he ever followed the law? He’s been accused of being a child rapist and is named thousands of times in the Epstein files. He’s hardly going to care about a few import taxes.

As predicted, Trump once again abuses his power to defend his own ego. Meanwhile, other countries scramble to keep up with every U-turn and sudden shift from the far-right US leader. Meanwhile, American citizens might pay the highest price, as Trump’s tariffs send the cost of goods skyrocketing.

As this X account pointed out below:

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, Trump says he’ll impose a 15% global tariff via his executive powers.

Once again, foreign countries won’t be paying the cost. You will. pic.twitter.com/DqM6DFbNMv https://t.co/DqM6DFbNMv

— Robert Reich (@RBReich) February 22, 2026

Trump, harming everyday people? Who knew.

Featured image via the Canary

Equity, the performers’ union, has announced it is boycotting the government’s survey in relation to BBC Charter renewal. It says it’s:

unfit for purpose in either detail or scope.

The union points to the survey’s complete absence of workforce consideration or representation, despite longstanding collective agreement arrangements with multiple trades unions which cover tens of thousands of BBC workers.

Equity is also encouraging its members to boycott the survey.

The union’s key criticisms of the survey are:

• Limited themes covered by questions.
• Public responses are to be aggregated by artificial intelligence software.
• Simplistic “agree or disagree” framing.
• Word limits where free text boxes exist, with limits of 50, 250 or 350 words for responses (many questions are almost 200 words long themselves).
• Airbrushing of workforce.

The BBC Charter

The Royal Charter is the constitutional basis for the BBC. It sets out the BBC’s objectives and purposes, as well as how it is governed and regulated.

The government’s survey launched just as parliament went into Christmas recess on 16 December 2025, with the consultation period closing on 10 March 2026. Although Equity is boycotting the survey, the union has actively engaged with other Charter renewal activity.

This includes sharing with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) a formal written submission covering the union’s policy proposals for the BBC – most of which sit outside the scope of the survey – as well as meeting with DCMS officials, BBC representatives and third parties.

Paul W Fleming, Equity’s general secretary, said:

Is the government setting out to do a W1A-esque satire of the Charter Renewal process? Its aim may be to ensure the BBC is accountable, yet this survey seems designed to actively avoid finding out what people think about the broadcaster and its future.

Not only is it restrictive, blinkered, and unfit for purpose in both detail and scope – it is contemptuous of the wide and varied BBC workforce, including directly employed, freelance and commissioned workers.

Advertisement

Creative workers will be dismayed at the missed opportunity to really delve into the purpose, position and possibilities for the BBC. And the fact that responses may be processed using artificial intelligence only adds insult to injury.

For these reasons, Equity is boycotting this survey, and we are encouraging our members to boycott it as well.

There needs to be an expansive consultation into the future of our public service broadcaster which genuinely seeks and listens to the views of the public, including the workers whose careers depend on the BBC.

Equity’s recommendations

Beyond the limitations of the survey, Equity intends to share with DCMS its key demands for a revitalised BBC. Chief among these is the recognition of trade unions as essential partners of the broadcaster to ensure good jobs – for employees as well as freelancers – to drive growth across the UK.

Equity is also asking for:

• A Workforce Covenant recognising that BBC commissioning and operational decisions must respond to the needs of the workforce as well as audiences, and imposing a legal duty to conduct workforce impact assessments and implement mitigation measures.
• A fair distribution of BBC investment across the nations and regions, starting with the Midlands.
• Workforce representation on the BBC Board.
• A substantial and guaranteed level of investment in audio drama series.
• A continuing or returning drama series that films for more than six months of the year in each of the UK’s Ofcom-defined reporting areas.
• An enforceable commitment to abide by an ethical and rights-based approach to AI, including seeking artists’ agreement to any use of generative AI and consulting relevant unions in that regard.

Survey questions

The 32 survey questions are available here: Britain’s Story: The Next Chapter – BBC Royal Charter Review, Green Paper and public consultation – GOV.UK

None of the questions ask about worker representation in the running or decision making of the BBC. The one question about workplace standards (question 5) does not allow a written response,  restricting respondents to simplistic tick box answers.

The only direct reference to “those working for the BBC” is in relation to pay, which appears to be a reference to ‘talent’ salaries, ie a tiny minority of highly paid people (question 6).

Featured image via the Canary

1. Listening to them is crucial

2. Show curiosity

3. Focus on boosting their emotional literacy

If they keep being left out, what’s the best course of action?

What Is SEND?

Why Does The SEND System Need Reform?

What Has The Government Announced?

Specialist And Targeted Categories

Extra Funding And Training

Are These Reforms A Good Idea?

Somaliland has granted the US access to its military bases and mineral resources. The deal comes just months after Israel recognised the new state. And colonial powers old and new, namely the UK and UAE, are in the mix too.

The new nation, a breakaway from Somalia, has only been recognised by Israel so far. The minister of the presidency Khadar Hussein Abdi said on 21 February:

We are willing to give exclusive [access to our minerals] to the United States. Also, we are open to offer military bases to the United States.

Adding:

We believe that we will agree on something with the United States.

Somaliland original declared autonomy from Somalia in the late 1990s. Israel’s recognition of Somaliland was slammed by Somalian officials at a UN session in December 2025:

Somaliland has huge strategic importance in the Horn of Africa, an area increasingly riven by regional and foreign ambitions.

Al Jazeera reported:

Somaliland lies across the Gulf of Aden from Yemen, where Houthi rebels have often attacked Israeli assets to show solidarity with Palestinians.

Adding that:

Somaliland officials have said their natural resources include lithium, coltan and other sought-after materials although independent studies are lacking.

But this isn’t just about local ambitions.

Israel and the Gulf cold war

Meanwhile Somaliland’s former president had demanded all details of a deal with Israel be disclosed. Muse Bihi Abdi said on 20 February:

The government has not yet disclosed what was agreed upon with Israel, and they are expected to do so.

If it turns out that the agreement violates our constitution, harms any Muslim, or fails to equally serve our mutual interests, then we will speak out about it.

The region was aggressively colonised by multiple imperial powers. As Middle East Eye (MEE) explained:

From 1884 until 1960, the region was governed by the UK as the Somaliland Protectorate, situated between Italian Somaliland (current Somalia) and French Somaliland (now Djibouti).

On 26 June 1960, Somaliland became independent from the UK. Five days later, it voluntarily united with Italian Somaliland to form Somalia.

These bitter colonial legacies endure alongside new extractive relationships.

Abraham Accords

Somaliland is one of several countries in the region which has signed up to the US-led Abraham Accords. The Accords require signatories to recognize Israel and normalise relations with the settler-colonial state.

MEE said that access to ports as well as proximity to Yemen and the Suez Canal were driving Israeli support. Israel’s close ally UAE has been engaging with Somaliland since the 2010s and has a port and a military base in the statelet.

The UAE’s cold war with Saudi Arabia, which is closer to the Somalian government, is also playing out through Somaliland, whose territory UAE has used to ship weapons to Sudan’s genocidal paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). MEE published a compelling breakdown of the competing actors, interests and networks in the region here. 

The UK is watching and waiting

The UK, an old colonial power in the region, still has ambitions for Somaliland. While the UK has not formally recognised Somaliland, it was one of several European countries to sign an infrastructure deal in 2020.

And in 2023, Tory MP Gavin Williamson lobbied the House of Commons for the UK to recognise Somaliland:

I recognise that maybe a nation of 5.7 million people does not seem significant to Britain, but it is significant.

He said Somaliland:

plays a pivotal role in terms of Africa, and I urge this House to take the action that is required to support the Republic of Somaliland and make sure that we deliver for the people of Somaliland as they have defended what we value so dearly, which is democracy and freedom.

Berbera port

African media reported the UK, UAE and others were close to recognition in January 2026. A source told DNE Africa:

Yes, there are a number of countries that are currently pushing this. Some of them include the list that has been published. I don’t think the government is in a position to disclose the identity of the other countries at this stage.

The UK also has a financial stake in Berbera port, which is at the centre of UAE and Israeli interests in the region:

The UK’s stake in Berbera port is held through the government’s foreign investment arm, British International Investment (BII), which jointly owns the strategic Horn of Africa port with the UAE’s logistics behemoth DP World and the Government of Somaliland.

It is significant that the first country to recognise Somaliland was Israel. It sounds like the UK, UAE and US aren’t far behind. Its location has already made it a key meeting point for the neocolonial ambitions of global and regional actors. If national autonomy is what people of Somaliland desire – and they’ve waited 30 years to get it – they couldn’t do much worse than the combination of colonialist allies their leaders have aligned with.

Featured image via the Canary

Members of Your Party Glasgow have announced they are to table a budget which refuses to cut services and builds towards returning public amenities into the hands of the people of Glasgow.

The party’s three councillors have agreed a budget proposal that includes transformative measures which could take steps to ending homelessness in the city, and moving workers to a four-day working week with no loss of pay.

In the line of fire are private contractors, who currently deliver council services at over-inflated prices, private landlords who exploit tenants across the city and worsen Glasgow’s housing crisis, and the Scottish government which has yet again left Glasgow in the lurch through systemic underfunding.

Key proposals from Your Party Glasgow councillors include:

• Bringing services in-house (£0): A cross-party working group will be established to investigate which roles should be brought back into council employ from overpriced contractors. This working group should include trade union representation from appropriate unions for sections under consideration.
• Re-establishing council housing (£150k): Funding to be provided for development of a route map to reintroducing council housing directly managed by Glasgow city council. This will ease the housing and homelessness crisis in the city and also investigate the purchasing of empty homes to be utilised for temporary homelessness accommodation as a first point of action on homelessness. Funding includes a budget for any required legal support for this work, which will be complete by the end of 2026.
• 4-Day Work Week for all Council Employees (£150k): Funding to be provided for development of a routemap to reduce staff working hours by 20%, while maintaining the same rate of pay. This will be completed by 2026 and will be led by a cross-party working group of councillors.

Current shortfalls will be met by increasing council tax by 5%. This is likely to be one of the lowest proposals in Scotland.

It is anticipated that a move to a four-day working week would save the council much more money than it would cost to implement due to a drastic reduction in staff absence, and an improvement in retention rate for the council.

Meanwhile, by bringing Glasgow city council services back in-house, councillors would be putting public services back into public control so they can be run in the interests of the people of Glasgow.

Restoring Glasgow’s council housing stock

The most eye-catching proposal is the attempt to move the council towards restarting a system of council house building and building up a stock of existing homes under council control – both of which will help to alleviate the worsening housing and homelessness crises engulfing the city.

Glasgow’s council housing stock was decimated as a result of a mass transfer of stock in 2003, followed by decades of private landlords and developers exploiting a lack of public interest housebuilding.

At present, Glasgow City Council owns no traditional council housing, despite over 600,000 people living in the city – and 8,446 homeless applications made in Glasgow in 2024/25.

Glasgow city council’s legal team has confirmed the budget proposals put forward by Your Party are competent and can thus be voted on by councillors of all parties on 24 February.

A proposal which would have seen fees doubled for the owners of short-term lets and HMO flats – both of which play a significant part in the city’s housing crisis – was ruled out by the council’s legal team.

Your Party’s three councillors are now appealing to representatives of other parties – including the ruling SNP council – to put the people of Glasgow first and back this budget, which will not do further harm to public services.

Councillor Seonad Hoy, Your Party councillor for Hillhead, said:

For years, Glasgow’s public services have been decimated by austerity, forced upon us by cuts to budgets handed down by the UK and Scottish Governments. As Your Party councillors, we are taking a stand against any further cuts.

We are putting forward a budget which includes proposals to empower council staff to work shorter weeks at no loss of pay, which has proven to lead to a happier, more productive workforce and cost savings where it has been implemented elsewhere in the UK.

We are also proposing to begin rebuilding council housing stock, initially by bringing empty homes back under the council’s control. This would enable the council to allocate housing to homeless households at a lower cost, and to provide a more seamless service to homeless people and families.

We hope that other parties are willing to engage with our proposals to allow these groundbreaking initiatives to progress.

In drafting the proposal, councillors were joined by a working group made up of volunteers from the party and other groups, including trade unions, who have worked to create this People’s Budget for ordinary Glaswegians.

Councillor Dan Hutchison, Your Party councillor for Govan, added:

Councillors shouldn’t be taking decisions based on how they manage decline. They should be taking them based on what’s best for their constituents, and the people of Glasgow. That is what we have put forward.

Our message to the SNP, Greens and others is clear: the ball is in your court. You can choose to further decimate the communities you represent, or invest in change. The choice is yours.

Featured image via the Canary

Parents react to the news