London-based law firm Hodge Jones & Allen LLP has written to the Metropolitan police challenging its revised policy on Palestine Action support. The firm has warned that any arrests the Met makes under the policy are likely to be unlawful.

The letter, written on behalf of campaign group Defend Our Juries, comes after a shock U-turn from the Met. Late on 25 March, the force announced that it will resume arrests under Terrorism legislation for people holding signs referencing support for protest group Palestine Action. This is despite the High Court ruling in February that the proscription of the group was unlawful.

This is a complete departure from the Met’s previous position. In an initial response to the ruling, the Met announced in February that it would stop making arrests of people showing support for the group. It said it would focus on collecting evidence instead.

While the Court stayed the effect of its judgment pending a government appeal, Hodge Jones & Allen argues that any arrests in the interim would be unlawful. This places significant pressure on the Met to justify its new position.

The letter states:

The Metropolitan police’s position is based on a misunderstanding of the legal position and will produce profoundly unfair results and unlawful arrests.

The decision of the High Court to ‘stay’ the effect of their ruling is not determinative of the legal position.

The Metropolitan police should have due regard, when assessing whether to conduct an action such arrest, to the fact that the High Court has unanimously found the legal position to be unlawful. Pending any successful appeal, that is an authoritative statement of the legal framework at present.

The letter highlights that courts have already adjourned all trials connected to the Defend Our Juries “Lift the Ban” campaign. Prosecutors themselves have indicated that proceedings should not continue until the legal framework is clarified. This would make any arrests futile as well as unlawful, since prosecutors can’t charge or conclude cases.

The letter continues:

In view of the difficulties in any case being charged or being concluded with a trial, we can see no merit in any arrest. We submit as follows:

Firstly, we fail to see how any arrest allows an officer to have reasonable suspicion that an offence has been committed nor that the “necessity” condition under s24 PACE 1984 is fulfilled. If an officer considers that there may be an offence, then the previous policy of monitoring and collecting evidence is sufficient.

Secondly, those seeking to take part in the “Lift the Ban Campaign” are exercising their rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It is clear that this is a campaign aimed at de-proscription. Any arrest is an interference with that right, and in these circumstances cannot be considered proportionate.

Advertisement

Therefore, we regard any arrest as unlawful.

Why is expressing support for Palestine Action suddenly arrestable again?

The Met’s previous position was that a “focus on gathering evidence”, rather than arrests, would be “the most proportionate approach”. It is unclear what has prompted the force to change their assessment of proportionality, other than recent correspondence with Defend Our Juries.

On 19 March, Defend Our Juries wrote to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, to raise the case of a woman arrested on 15 March. Police arrested her for holding a sign expressing support for Palestine Action, in breach of the Met’s policy at the time. The group was not consulted prior to the policy change announced on 25 March, and further mass arrests under Terrorism legislation are now expected in Trafalgar Square on 11 April, when Defend Our Juries’ next silent vigil is planned.

As the letter highlights, the only basis for these arrests is a law which the High Court has ruled to be unlawful. Hodge, Jones & Allen is seeking urgent assurances from the Met that participants in the “Lift the Ban” campaign will not be arrested while the legal position remains unresolved.

A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said:

The Met has lost the plot. The ‘Lift the Ban’ campaign against the unlawful proscription of Palestine Action was vindicated by the High Court, and yet they’re still going to arrest us on terrorism charges for peaceful protest even now.

Rather than admit that the arrest of a woman under the Terrorism Act on 15 March breached their own policy, they have now changed the policy to try to make it fit retrospectively. That’s just embarrassing.

The Met will now waste even more public resources on arresting hundreds more people for terrorism charges on the basis of a proscription order which the High Court has already ruled unlawful.

How can they believe that’s proportionate or in the public interest? Nothing has changed since they said on 13 February that stopping arrests was “the most proportionate approach we can take.

Advertisement

The deputy assistant commissioner stated that they needed to give ‘clear guidance’ to their officers. Nothing says ‘clear guidance’ like regularly changing your mind over the unlawful arrests of thousands of peaceful protesters holding paper signs.

Featured image via M Lyman / Defend Our Juries

The British military trained nearly 2000 overseas troops in its defence academies between 2017 and 2025. That figure includes personnel from 108 countries. Shockingly, fourteen of those countries are on the UK’s own human rights watchlist.

The British-based Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) reported on 24 March 2026 that the UK considers those states to have:

significant issues relating to democracy, governance or civil liberties.

Yet the UK still trained them anyway…

The so-called International Defence Training (IDT) programme is meant to:

promote professionalism and improve standards among partner forces.

AOAV said they fear the courses risk:

 strengthening security forces accused of abuses.

British military teaching dictatorships

The countries include Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and Uzbekistan. AOAV also said there were obvious gaps in the figures. For example:

Israel does not appear in the dataset, despite the MoD previously confirming that a “limited number” of Israeli personnel have been trained in the UK. No explanation is given for the omission.

AOAV said the IDT permits:

foreign military personnel to attend courses at UK institutions including the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst and the Defence Academy in Shrivenham.

Training ranges from basic officer instruction to specialist and postgraduate courses. The government says the programme helps build long-term relationships and encourages adherence to international norms.

Advertisement

Adding:

An MoD spokesperson has previously said that all training is “carefully assessed” and aligned with UK values.

Real risk of violations

Dr Iain Overton, Executive Director of AOAV, said:

There is a real risk that UK training may end up enhancing the capabilities of forces that go on to commit violations.

In September 2025 Declassified UK revealed the UK was still training Israeli soldiers at the Royal College of Defence Studies (RCDS) two years into the genocide:

The soldiers trained at RCDS include Colonel Yaniv Asor, the current chief of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) Southern Command who oversees military operations in Gaza.

Asor was recently accused by the head of the Israeli air force of responsibility for mass civilian casualties in Gaza.

Advertisement

Charlie Herbert, a retired British army general, told Declassified at the time:

That it has taken so long to bar IDF officers from the prestigious Royal College of Defence Studies is a disgrace.

Even now, it is not sufficient to ban them from 2026. Instead all IDF personnel currently studying or training at UK military establishments should be expelled immediately.

The British government is speaking out of both sides of its mouth again. Its proclaimed commitment to human rights and a mythical ‘rules-based international order’ have been sorely exposed by support for Israeli genocide in Gaza and an illegal US attack on Iran. The fact the UK is still training authoritarian regimes alongside all this should shock precisely nobody.

Featured image via the Canary

Staff and fans of Ipswich Town football club have complained bitterly at an unannounced stunt to promote racist far-right Trump fan Nigel Farage. Farage published a promotional video for his politics filmed as he stood on the Portman Road pitch. The club then had insisted it is “apolitical” and denied “formally” inviting Farage to visit the club, but details that have emerged since refute the denial, showing that:

👉An associate of CEO Mark Ashton sent an invite to Nigel Farage
👉Farage was met by Marcus Nash, director of media and communications
👉Ashton and COO Luke Werhun had lunch with Farage
👉The club gifted Farage SIX ‘Farage 10’ shirts
👉 Employees outside a select few were unaware of the stunt
👉Members of staff have made complaints

This is despite the club claiming they were ‘apolitical’ in a statement made on Wednesday.

Farage’s lunch was provided free – the latest in a long line of freebies provided to the racist bigot by wealthy and often foreign donors. He also failed to declare more than £380,000 in outside earnings within the legally-required timeframe.

Nigel Farage’s visit to Ipswich Town’s Portman Road stadium has prompted a significant social media backlash.

Ipswich insist Reform UK and Farage were not formally invited by the club … but The Athletic has been told a slightly different story.

Advertisement

📝 @Dan_Sheldon_

Free to read… pic.twitter.com/ojBbQQRmH4

— The Athletic | Football (@TheAthleticFC) March 24, 2026

Club staff have complained and fans groups have expressed their outrage on social media. Supporters’ group Blue Action accused bosses of letting the club they love be:

egregiously exploited by a political figure for personal gain and those in charge seemingly allowing and even welcoming it … risk[ing] alienating large numbers of the fanbase and fomenting division.

Featured image via the Canary

The Starmer government has opened a “terrifying” ‘consultation’ on its plan to remove the need for medical training for classification as qualified by the General Medical Council (GMC).

The GMC, until recently, exclusively regulated doctors – those with full medical qualifications. The Starmer-Streeting axis has already – with the collusion of the GMC – started to erode that distinction by allowing the GMC to regulate ‘medical associates’ – people with far less training than an actual doctor.

A number of people have already died after misdiagnosis or wrong treatment by ‘associates’ they believed were doctors. The government knows using these roles to fill medical positions is extremely dangerous – and have been told the same repeatedly by doctors and academics.

Starmer making things much worse

But now, the government is going further. It has opened a ‘consultation‘ on:

the draft General Medical Council Order 2026, which would reform how the General Medical Council (GMC) regulates medical practitioners, physician associates and anaesthesia associates across the UK.

So far, so bland. But it’s not. As Doctors Association co-chair Dr Matt Kneale explains in a thread on X, it means allowing the GMC to “remove the guardrails” separating actual doctors from other people presenting in white coats in medical settings:

2/ Currently, under s34L of the Medical Act 1983, a CCT can only be awarded to a registered medical practitioner who has completed an approved specialist or GP training programme. This is one of the statutory foundations of the specialist register.

— Dr Matt Kneale (🦋drmk.link) (@mattster) March 26, 2026

4/ Article 26 governs GMC approval of education and training. It applies to all “regulated professionals” – which under this Order includes physician assistants (PAs) and physician assistants in anaesthesia (PAAs), not just doctors.

— Dr Matt Kneale (🦋drmk.link) (@mattster) March 26, 2026

6/ On top of this, the draft Order abolishes the specialist register as a distinct statutory entity. Under the new framework, GMC maintains a single register with separate parts for doctors, PAs and PAAs.

The statutory guardrails that limited CCTs to doctors are being removed.

Advertisement

— Dr Matt Kneale (🦋drmk.link) (@mattster) March 26, 2026

This then means the GMC can extend ‘CCTs’, until now only available to fully-trained doctors, to ‘associates’ with a fraction of the training. This is self-evidently dangerous – and all of us need to act now:

6/ On top of this, the draft Order abolishes the specialist register as a distinct statutory entity. Under the new framework, GMC maintains a single register with separate parts for doctors, PAs and PAAs.

The statutory guardrails that limited CCTs to doctors are being removed.

— Dr Matt Kneale (🦋drmk.link) (@mattster) March 26, 2026

Advertisement

10/ Eroding its statutory exclusivity to doctors would be a seismic change.

The consultation closes 23rd June 2026. Every doctor – and every patient who cares about who holds a CCT – should respond.

— Dr Matt Kneale (🦋drmk.link) (@mattster) March 26, 2026

Intervention needed

As one clinician said this morning:

EVERYONE (whether doctors or not) must contribute to this ‘consultation’

It states that the GMC will be able to decide whether a PERSON (not ‘a doctor’) can be put onto the Specialist Register. Not just PAs, I assume, but also ACPs, presumably having been assessed by other PAs or ACPs.

Advertisement

Also, the GMC wants to continue to appeal against tribunal decisions not to sanction/strike off doctors for things like protesting against genocide.

This organisation needs a total boycott and is certainly not fit for purpose in any way.

The Doctors Association will be submitting its own direct response. But everyone who cares about the NHS, or even just about their own safety and health, needs to do the same.

Featured image via the Canary

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.

It might be spring, but the clouds are still winning their battle with the sun for top spot in the UK. So while it’s peak gardening season, cajoling yourself to get outside is not the most appealing of tasks.

Just like any dreaded task (think: hoovering, laundry, or taking the bins out), bringing a new tool or accessory into the mix could be just what you need to have you Julie Andrews-style leaping around your garden.

Whether you’re undergoing a complete garden makeover, or simply sprucing it up with some fresh shoots, what you use (and wear) can make the difference between a hard days’ work and cosying up inside.

So if you need a little push to get outside before the weather perks up, here’s everything you need for gardening inspo this (so far un-)sunny season.

The government’s ‘Rycroft Review’ report on foreign interference in UK politics has been confirmed as a sham immediately it was published, after it failed to mention Israel a single time. And this is only what Skwawkbox and others predicted, since Starmer minister Steve Reed is a die-hard ‘friend of genocide’ who also didn’t mention Israel once when commissioning it in December 2025.

Israel: those who will not be named

Russia gets seven mentions. Israel – so far ahead of other countries in terms of interference in UK politics that it’s (literally) out of sight – none at all. And Reed is ‘under fire’ for – oops – ‘forgetting’ to disclose just how tight he is with the Israel lobby. Or mention it at all. Just like he ‘forgot’ the massive donations he’s accepted from the Israel lobby:

NEW: A Labour minister is under fire after failing to declare his relationship with the pro-Israel lobby when he unveiled a report on foreign interference in the UK

Steve Reed failed to declare his affiliation with the influential Labour Friends of Israel group pic.twitter.com/nJGIUm6sFh

— Laura Webster (@LauraEWebsterr) March 26, 2026

Advertisement

In fact, its very absence from the report is as clear a demonstration as could be of the extent of its influence. The National describes Reed’s omission as “incredible”, but in the literal sense it’s the absolute opposite: totally believable and unsurprising. Just appalling.

The scale of the farce becomes even clearer when China and Iran get a special mention – just as Israel is looking to drag the UK into its illegal war on Iran. A section titled “How serious is the problem?” of “long-term strategic foreign interference” quotes a government briefing naming those two countries as the crux of the problem:

The UK is a target of long-term strategic foreign interference and espionage from elements of the Russian, Chinese and Iranian states which, in different ways, seek to further their economic and strategic interests and cause harm to our democratic institutions”.

But not Israel. Noooo. No no no no no. Who even is Israel?’, the uninformed reader might ask.

Beep boop

So, a minister superglued to the Israel lobby – which terrifies British politicians and broadcasters alike and believes it is entitled to demand special consideration at every turn – commissions a report that conspicuously omits, completely, any mention of the biggest foreign interferer in UK (and US) politics.

“This is not the droid you’re looking for. Move along, move along.”

Nothing to see here. Obvs.

Featured image via the Canary

The Animal Welfare Committee, which advises the UK government, has published a damning report condemning the animal suffering involved in the fur trade.

Its report on ‘the responsible sourcing of fur’ calls out the suffering inflicted on animals who are confined in cages on fur farms or caught in brutal traps in the wild. And it indicates support for legislative action, stating:

consumer and market forces currently do not and cannot provide sufficient pressure to adequately safeguard animal welfare.

Despite banning the farming of animals for their fur more than two decades ago, the UK imports millions of pounds worth of animal fur from overseas every year. This creates a double standard, says Humane World for Animals UK (formerly called Humane Society International UK), which leads the #FurFreeBritain campaign.

The charity is calling on the UK government to act on the report’s findings and deliver on its recent Animal Welfare Strategy commitment to ‘uphold high animal welfare standards in trade’ by banning the UK’s bloody fur trade for good.

Meanwhile, DEFRA has published responses to its 2021 Call for Evidence on the UK fur trade. The results show more than 96% of the almost 30,000 respondents strongly agreed that killing animals for their fur is wrong. Respondents:

overwhelmingly did not support the import, sale or export of fur or fur products.

Claire Bass, senior director of campaigns and public affairs for Humane World for Animals UK said:

It’s clear from the Committee’s findings that trading in fur from caged, tormented, diseased and injured animals is completely at odds with the UK government’s recent Animal Welfare Strategy commitment to ‘uphold high animal welfare standards as part of our approach to trade’.

The Committee states that fur should not be sourced from animals who have not had ‘a life worth living’ or a humane death and then explains all the ways in which the global fur trade fails to meet these criteria.

The previous Labour government rightly banned fur farming 25 years ago. We must now stop outsourcing that same suffering overseas. The government now has both formal evidence and a strong public mandate to end the UK’s bloody fur trade.

Advertisement

Animal Welfare Committee report quotes and conclusions

The Animal Welfare Committee states that:

Within a commercial setting it is not possible and is unlikely to ever be possible to farm species such as fox and raccoon dog without having a detrimental effect on their health and welfare, or in a way which meets their welfare needs.

It adds:

There are no species being farmed for fur whose welfare needs are being adequately met by current standards and safeguards.

The report’s concerns include:

• Criticism that cage sizes within industry ‘welfare assurance’ schemes are ‘insufficient to meet physical and psychological welfare needs’, and cage design is inadequate.
• The use of inhumane killing methods, including CO2 which ‘has been shown to be a highly aversive method of killing mink [which] fails to kill rapidly’, and anal electrocution.
• Criticism of fur industry assurance schemes for both farmed and trapped fur, including outdated welfare science and lack of: consistency, training, unannounced inspections, independent auditing and traceability.
• Lack of industry consideration of the experience and welfare of individual animals on fur farms, with welfare assurance schemes such as WelFur permitting a high threshold of allowance for animals with serious welfare problems (e.g 15% of foxes may have ‘severely bent feet’).
• Challenges with traceability of the country of origin, species and method of production of fur (farmed or trapped) imported into the UK, using available data from HMRC.
• Although over a third (37%) of fur imported to the UK over the last 10 years came from China, the Committee was unable to obtain any evidence about industry application of ‘welfare certification’ schemes in the country.
• Concern that trapping standards for fur subsequently imported into the UK are ‘not sufficient to prevent unnecessary suffering, and do not adequately protect animal welfare’. The standards permit lethal head/chest crushing traps that take five minutes to kill species including beavers and otters.
• Concern that “consumers are not currently able to accurately identify whether products are fur of animal origin (wild caught or farmed) or ‘faux’ fur, or a mixture of the two”.

Public opposition to the fur trade

The evidence released today, of animal suffering and also of strong public opposition to the fur trade, now puts the need for a fur import ban beyond doubt. Therefore, Humane World for Animals UK is calling on the government to act swiftly.

More than 200 MPs support the Fur Free Britain campaign. Ruth Jones MP led a Westminster Hall debate earlier in March which saw cross-party support for the issue.

There is also strong public support for a ban on fur imports and sales. 77% of UK voters believe that when a type of farming is banned in the UK for being too cruel, we should also ban imports of products produced the same way overseas.

Last year campaigners handed in a 1.5 million signature petition to the prime minister in support of a ban. Furthermore, the vast majority (93%) of the UK public reject wearing real animal fur, while only 3% wear it. The same poll found that the words 79% of people most closely associated with a fashion brand selling fur are ‘unethical’, ‘outdated’, ‘cruel’ and ‘out of touch’.

The Animal Welfare Committee’s findings echo the damning indictment delivered by the European Food Safety Authority’s 2025 scientific opinion on the welfare of animals on fur farms. It concluded that the cage systems used on fur farms fail to meet the basic welfare needs of mink, foxes, raccoon dogs and chinchillas. And this includes the industry’s so-called “high welfare” or “certified farms”.

Featured image via Kristo Muurimaa / Oikeutta eläimille / Humane World for Animals UK

1) Put your phone away at least half an hour before bed

2) Will yourself awake

3) Give the “military method” a go

4) Check your thermostat

5) Exercise four to eight hours before bed

6) Stick to a regular sleep routine