Hello and welcome back to Canary Catch Up, your one-stop shop for must-watch TV. That’s along with a healthy dose of hate watching and my favourite thing – gossip about people I don’t actually care about.

I’m fully refreshed after a weekend in the Scottish Highlands, where I watched zero tv. But I have been getting stuck into the Fourth Wing book series. I tore through the first book, and I’m fully immersed in Iron Flame now. If you’re looking for a book series with incredible disability representation, this is the one for you.

Anyway, on to the telly!

SNL UK is actually good

When SNL UK was announced, there was a collective, country-wide eye roll. ‘We don’t need that American excuse for comedy over here’, we all cried. But boy, were we fucking wrong. SNL UK is sharp, witty and most importantly, silly. We’ve only had two episodes so far, but we’ve already seen sketches that will be quoted and sung for years. Jack Shep’s Diana impression will be one for the ages, along with George Fouracres’ What Kind of Irish is Your Grandad? song.

It turns out, when you give comedians who haven’t been plastered all over panel shows free rein with good writing and let them play, it’s actually funny. Who knew?!

MomTok might not actually survive this

The wheels have fallen off The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives. In the last couple of weeks, Momtok and Dadtok have been embroiled in many a scandal. Now I’m not going to get into the abuse allegations and Taylor and Dakota. But one thing I will say is that the incident is literally in the first series of the show. It’s only after it’s all come out in the press that producers cancelled filming, ABC have axed her series of The Bachelorette, sponsors have pulled out, and her co-stars are denouncing her.

This really says a lot about how much those involved in reality TV are willing to ignore, as long as it makes them money.

Not wanting to miss out on the limelight, Jessi’s cunt of a husband, Jordan, publicly filed for divorce. Sick of the little controlling weasel blaming their marriage troubles on her, Jessi went on the podcast Call Her Daddy and fully exposed him. THEN when we thought that was enough Momtok drama, it turns out Jessi went and snogged Miranda’s ex Chase, who’s also been with Taylor and Layla. And I might be too obsessed with these people’s lives to be honest.

A charming slice of Regency escapism

One thing you need to know about me is that I am a slag for a Pride and Prejudice reimagining. The same story but told via a YouTube series, yes! With zombies? Gobbling that up. And now there’s another brilliant adaptation to add to the fold. The Other Bennet Sister tells the story from the often-forgotten Mary’s POV.

Mary is the ‘bookish’ sister who doesn’t give a shit about marriage, who has always been portrayed as boring, but she’s so much more, as the series shows. This absolutely charming 10-part piece of Regency escapism is just what we need at the minute.

Strictly pro dancers are dropping like flies

This time of year, there are usually a few rumours around who will stay on and who will leave Strictly Come Dancing. But this year, it seemed every single fucking pro has been rumoured to be leaving. But there’s something to be said for leaving a sinking ship, as apparently a lot of them were right. So far Karen, who’s been with the show the longest, Luba and Nadiya have all been confirmed by the BBC.

Last year, Karen was paired with Harry and his incredible dancing pecs. My favourite moment of Nadiya’s last year was when she said pro men usually can’t lift her, dead in the face of her ex Kai.

However, one of the newer pros, Michelle, has been speaking out to the press about being axed. In fairness, Michelle isn’t exactly memorable and has only had one celeb partner in four years on the show. But if my show was facing brand new hosts and a raft of pros leaving, I’d be clinging onto any dancers I could keep.

Now, if you don’t mind, the second half of The Other Bennet Sister has just dropped on iPlayer!

Featured image via YouTube/SNL UK

A protest has been scheduled outside Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday 1 April at 9am. Supporters are expecting to hear the verdict in the trial of two leaders of the Palestine movement.

Ben Jamal, director of Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), and Chris Nineham, vice chair of Stop the War Coalition (SWC), were both charged with public order offences in 2025.

A test case for new police powers

The charges relate to a protest organised outside BBC Portland Place on 18 January 2025. It was scheduled to be the 22nd march for Palestine after 15 months of sustained demonstrations. All of the previous protests had be peaceful and lawful.

The march to BBC Portland Place was no exception. Demonstrators intended to lay flowers outside the building in memory of those killed in Gaza or, if stopped by police, to lay flowers at their feet.

Police originally allowed the protest to take place, after making a request to postpone it, which the organisers agreed too. However, following complaints submitted by various representatives within the Jewish community – including the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC), Central London Synagogue and the Chief Rabbi – permission was withdrawn on the grounds of ‘cumulative disruption’.

The use of such powers was not formalised by the government until October 2025. Nevertheless, they were tested haphazardly on those marching that day.

The Metropolitan Police alleged the breach of protest conditions was ‘coordinated’ and deliberate. The Canary previously reported on various ‘inaccuracies’ in the Met’s version of events.

‘Ludicrous’ criminalisation

During Jamal and Nineham’s trial, which spanned three weeks, the court heard all about the chaotic policing operation on the day of the protest. This included the claim that police officers on the ground had no knowledge that a small delegation wanted to walk to the BBC to lay flowers.

The defence argued that there was no case to answer, but this rejected by the judge without giving reasons. The defence barrister described the Crown’s case as a

ludicrous invitation to criminalise legitimate protected political speech about the misuse of state power against people’s civil liberties.

As Jamal and Nineham await the verdict in their case, Stop the War Coalition are now inviting supporters to gather outside the court. Speakers at the protest on Wednesday include RMT union general secretary Eddie Dempsey, PCS union president Martin Cavanagh and Holocaust survivor Stephen Kapos.

Labour’s Angela Rayner seems to be preparing for a leadership race once Keir Starmer’s gone and she apparently thinks she can emulate Green Party leader Zack Polanski’s successes. But if she really wanted to convince left-wingers to stop leaving Labour, she really shouldn’t have prioritised a chat with far-right racist Michael Gove.

As political editor at the Times, Steven Swinford, explained:

Angela Rayner is preparing to launch a podcast called Beyond the Bubble as she seeks to broaden her appeal before a potential Labour leadership contest.

The former deputy prime minister has interviewed Lord [Michael] Gove, the former Tory cabinet minister, as the star guest on the pilot, which is focused on housing.

The two apparently “get on well”, Swinford said.

Rayner: “I need to replicate the success that Zack has seen creating and contributing to the left wing media ecosphere, reaching out to voters rather than the establishment.”

also Rayner: “My first guest will be Michael Gove.” https://t.co/0AMfz0IwRX

— Gareth Dennis (@GarethDennis) March 27, 2026

Gove is editor at the Spectator and a proud Zionist, who has repeatedly denied Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. He’s said that Israeli influence in Britain should grow even further, despite the significant influence the pro-Israel lobby wields over UK politics.

This guy? https://t.co/XRYwoJ2oWb pic.twitter.com/IC3KM0vG3O

— Barry Malone (@malonebarry) March 26, 2026

The Spectator has long been a dishonest, racist, far-right rag and has openly normalised hate.

In particular, the hateful, divisive magazine reserves a special disdain for Muslim communities. Indeed, it has been a leading media source for Islamophobic content. And its racist propaganda regularly gives Nazi media a run for its money.

It might seem like a strange choice for Rayner to have Gove as her first guest if she’s trying to get left-wing votes, but it makes complete sense when you consider just how comfortable Rayner is with the political and economic establishment.

Angela Rayner offers more of the same right-wing Labour decay

Labour Together — the shady right-wing group with millionaire backers that helped undermine Jeremy Corbyn and crown Keir Starmer as his successor — knows Starmer’s time is up. It sees Rayner as a potential successor.

The influence of Labour Together in the current Labour government is massive. Rayner is very much a part of its network of influence, so she’s clearly comfortable getting corporate money while pretending in public to be progressive.

Her voting record, meanwhile, shows how happy she is to play along and vote against ordinary people’s interests.

Despite everything Keir Starmer’s government has put the country through since 2024, Rayner has stuck by him and called for party unity, insisting:

The Prime Minister has my full support in leading us to that end.

And despite reality, she repeatedly tried to convince people ahead of the recent Gorton and Denton by-election that “only Labour” could stop Reform. After Labour predictably didn’t beat Reform, she said:

It’s time to really listen – and to reflect.

She just didn’t say how she was going to reflect and who she was going to listen to: one of the most influential hate-mongers in the UK.

That is unfortunately completely typical for the right-wing forces dominating Labour today and it should serve as a clear reminder that Rayner just offers more of the same.

Featured image via Getty Images/ Christopher Furlong

What are “zeitgebers”?

Why do zeitgebers help with our circadian rhythm?

As a family, how often do you discuss values and respect?

Illustration by Tracy Worrall

10 min read10 min

Hundreds of children with the very highest level of need are being locked away from society, often in illegal, unregistered homes with a rolling rota of untrained staff, because of shortages in therapeutic care.

These children can be controlled through frequent physical restraint and denied basic rights such as contact with family and friends or an education, the ultimate victims of a care system in crisis. They are held under Deprivation of Liberty (DoL) orders, which were designed to give special legal powers to local authorities to restrict the freedom and rights of children and teenagers considered to be an extreme risk to themselves or others.

The orders are handed down through the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court, not criminal courts, but can be more repressive and open-ended than even Young Offender Institutions. Though they are meant to be an emergency, short-term response, critics say they are increasingly being used to plug gaps in health and social care services.

Since 2017, the number of orders has rocketed from just over 100 a year to around 1,300. There are now three times the number of children detained under them than there are in prison, and a fifth stay in place for at least a year. The Children’s Commissioner found that a third were placed in unregistered homes – which are not monitored by education regulator Ofsted – often because legal homes refuse to take them.

The rise can be largely attributed to an increase in older children entering care with complex issues, the collapse of mental health and early intervention services, the reduction of places in secure children’s homes and paediatric psychiatric wards and a shortage of foster carers and children’s homes with the acute expertise and experience needed to support them in the community.

Restrictions often include a ratio of between one and five adults around the child 24 hours a day, sometimes sat outside their bedrooms at night and with bars on windows and locks on every door and limits or bans on phone and internet use. Two thirds come with the right for staff to use physical restraint.

Children subjected to them are almost always in the care system and have complex and unmet needs, such as mental health issues, physical and learning disabilities, and the legacy of early life trauma, sexual and criminal exploitation and familial abuse or neglect.

Judges, campaigners and human rights advocates have all raised concerns about their inappropriate overuse for children who have already been let down by poor, fragmented health and social care services, often leading to an escalation of their challenges.

I was just contained like a wild animal for more than two years, not supported

Advertisement

When most teenagers her age were juggling busy social lives with the build-up to GCSEs, Roismi was being kept in a locked house and followed everywhere by five adults from a rolling rota of paid staff. At a time when she needed unconditional love and privacy during adolescence, her every movement was scrutinised; any change of mood or sign of emotion might lead to terrifying physical restraint.

She was not in trouble with the police or considered a risk to society – only to herself after a history of sexual, psychological and physical abuse, and failures of the services that were supposed to help her recover from her trauma.

After being sectioned hundreds of times and moved through countless foster homes and residential placements, Roismi, who is autistic and has ADHD and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, was put on a DoL Order in unregistered accommodation.

Roismi says she was made to feel like a “demon” by staff who appeared to fear rather than understand her.

“Every movement was controlled,” she explains. “I was watched all the time by people I didn’t know. I cannot cope with being in a room with lots of people. I would go to the kitchen and five people would follow me in so I would retreat to my room, the only place I had moments of privacy. I lost a significant amount of weight in two months.”

Even in her bedroom, staff checked on her every 15 minutes, 24 hours per day, adding insomnia to her problems.

“The damage done to me will last a lifetime,” she adds. “I was just contained like a wild animal for more than two years, not supported. I lost my friends. I only left the house for appointments. It was so much worse than being sectioned in a hospital, where at least I could associate with other young people like me. I wish I had stayed in my abusive family home because at least by now I might have an education and some kind of normal life.”

Anela Anwar, CEO of care charity Become, which has supported Roismi, says: “A society having to resort to depriving children in care of their liberty because there are no safe and suitable homes is one completely failing the children in its care.

“But it doesn’t have to be this way. Through proper investment, the government can create the right homes in the right places, especially those that offer more therapeutic support, to give children the care and stability they need.”

Roismi experienced 18 months of stability in a good, therapeutic children’s home with trauma-informed staff, but she was thrown back into chaos when her most trusted caregiver had to leave.

Latest quarterly figures show the majority on DoL orders are aged 13 to 15, but there was a 52 per cent rise in under-12s over just three months last year.

The orders severely restrict access to education, training or work, and disrupt important relationships and any medical or therapeutic interventions.

Carolyne Willow, a campaigning barrister specialising in children’s rights, says: “It is intolerable that highly vulnerable children continue to be deprived of their liberty in arrangements cobbled together in crisis and haste, often in unregistered children’s homes devoid of Ofsted scrutiny and other protections such as monthly independent safeguarding checks.”

She says the lack of specialist, skilled local authority provision is driving the increase in cases to the High Court for the last resort “safety net” of DoL orders.

“These children are being typically held in so-called ‘solo placements’ where they are under constant surveillance by staff who often have neither the training nor support to meet their considerable needs.”

Research led by the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (FJO) into the risk factors and reasons for increases in orders, and the conditions and outcomes children on them face, found they were placed an average of 56 miles from home, and more than half were put in unregistered – therefore illegal – provision.

Roismi’s experiences were reflected in interviews with other young people for the project, who described the draconian orders as damaging, re-traumatising and exacerbating existing problems, leading to feelings of isolation, hopelessness, despondency, distrust and resentment. Some told of being repeatedly restrained by staff who had not been trained, in which they suffered injuries as well as psychological trauma.

Some said they had not been told why they were on one or how to get it removed, while others said they had not spoken to their families for months. Many, like Roismi, said they were completely unprepared when they were thrown back into the real world at 18, expecting to end up dead or in prison.

FJO director Lisa Harker says: “The reality is, they very rarely go to school, a few have learning at home. They often have complex mental health and trauma-related issues, however they do not get priority in CAMHS [Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services] even though they are often moved around a lot, meaning they never get to the front of any queue.

“Services may say they can only start treatment once settled. So they are denied the very help that might get them off a DoL, keeping them prolonged, and are then dumped when they are 18 with no education, having not developed social skills or been able to learn how to be independent and with mental health issues that have been allowed to escalate in the absence of any meaningful support.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Education said: “These reports of children’s experiences are shocking, and we recognise the concerns raised. We are making major changes to children’s social care to ensure that when, in the most serious cases, a child needs to be deprived of their liberty for their own safety, they are cared for in accommodation that is safe, appropriate and fit for purpose.

“Children should not be facing placements in unregistered homes when they need the highest levels of care and protection.”

They added that the government was spending £2.4bn on supporting families to stay together and £560m to create more places for children in high-quality, registered homes.

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is proposing new DoLs accommodation in the community, as an alternative to secure children’s homes where they are unable to leave the premises, and would strengthen oversight and accountability where children are deprived of their liberty. However, the changes could take years to take effect and the rate of incarceration through DoL orders continues to rise.

Campaigners including the Children’s Commissioner are calling for the bill to go further, mandating national data recording and oversight of every DoL and legal representation for those affected, as well as a clear legal and regulatory framework safeguarding their rights and welfare.

There are alternative models, such as the multi-agency Myst (My Support Team) model in Wales, an intensive mental health service for children on the edge in the care system which works with their carers to provide holistic, long-term support before issues escalate to the point where a DoL might be needed.

As well as drastically improving their outcomes and wellbeing, such early, committed interventions, while costly in the short term, will undoubtedly reduce pressures on council resources down the line.

Secure children’s homes can cost £350,000 a year, but an intensive DoL order such as Roismi’s – which included four trained nurses at all times – can cost up to £3m.

Now 20, she is in supported living and has more freedom, but says she has lost years of her childhood and is now struggling to catch up before all support ends when she turns 25. She has been so institutionalised, she says, she still automatically asks for permission just to be able to go outside and has accumulated £28,000 of debt in unpaid rent and bills, having been unaware she needed to sign on for the housing element of Universal Credit.

Despite all the challenges she has faced, she has set up a not-for-profit organisation, My Trauma is Chronic but I’m Iconic, which mentors and supports other young people as they go into adulthood after care or other adverse early life experiences.

However, Roismi is an anomaly in a care system that is failing so badly that leavers are seven to eight times more likely to die before they reach the age of 21, five times more likely to die by suicide and make up around a quarter of the prison and homeless populations.