Keir Starmer at a D-Day national commemoration event in 2024 (Alamy)

4 min read51 min

On the anniversary of D-Day, remembering the sacrifices of the past must go hand in hand with renewing our commitment to those who serve today.

Advertisement

Thirteen years ago, I was standing on a beach in Normandy, with my back to the sea, looking across the broad sands to the low hills and fields that lie near the city of Caen. I was there with my fellow officer cadets from the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst on a battlefield tour. Even to us at the start of our military careers, we could see just how hard a task it would be to land in the cold, knee-deep water, wade onto the soft sand, and assault up the beach towards the pitiless, ceaseless machine-gun positions of the Germans.

And yet, 82 years ago, on 6 June 1944, that is exactly what more than 156,000 Allied troops did to liberate Western Europe from Nazi occupation.

Many were still in their teens. Yet they faced danger with remarkable courage and, in doing so, helped to secure the freedoms we continue to enjoy today.

Advertisement

Days like today remind us not to take that freedom for granted. It was hard won by a generation who made extraordinary sacrifices, and we owe it to them to remember that.

Every anniversary of D-Day is a moment for remembrance. We remember those who never came home. We honour those who carried the scars of war for the rest of their lives. And we give thanks to a generation whose service changed the course of history forever.

But D-Day also reminds us that remembrance alone is not enough. If we are serious about honouring those who serve, then we must prove it in the way we treat today’s armed forces community.

Advertisement

From my own experience, I know that the transition back into civilian life is not always straightforward

As I experienced during my own years of service, I know that military life asks a great deal not just of military personnel, but of the families who stand behind them. I also know that while service brings a sense of belonging and purpose, it also demands sacrifices that can be felt long after a military career is over.

That is why the Armed Forces Covenant matters. It is built on a simple principle: that those who serve, or have served, and their families should face no disadvantage because of their service to our country.

Advertisement

At the general election just under two years ago, Labour promised to strengthen that Covenant and extend it across government. And through the Armed Forces Bill, we are delivering on that promise.

For the first time, the Covenant will apply across central government, devolved governments and local authorities. This matters because the challenges faced by military personnel, veterans and their families do not fit neatly into one department. They can involve housing, healthcare, children’s education, employment support and much more.

From my own experience, I know that the transition back into civilian life is not always straightforward, and I, alongside my colleagues, am steadfast in the belief that no veteran who has served our country should be left to navigate those challenges alone.

This change will mean public services are legally required to consider the unique circumstances of the armed forces community.

Advertisement

It will help deliver better support for tens of thousands of serving personnel, veterans and their families across the country, and I am proud to support it.

On D-Day, those who fought trusted that the country they served would prove worthy of their sacrifice. Today, our duty is to honour that trust – not only on anniversaries, but all year round.

So today, we pay tribute to the heroes of the past by renewing our commitment to the Armed Forces Covenant and to the armed forces community itself: a promise that your country will never forget the sacrifices you make, and that your service will never be taken for granted.

 

Advertisement

Louise Sandher-Jones MP is Labour MP for North East Derbyshire and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Veterans and People

Source link

Ed Davey has served as leader of the Liberal Democrats since 2020 (Alamy)

8 min read37 min

The Liberal Democrats are under pressure to remain relevant, with their own MPs publicly admitting there is frustration about the party’s lack of progress since the last general election. PoliticsHome can reveal that a strategy “rethink” is now underway at the top of the party.

Advertisement

In 2024, the Lib Dems achieved a record result with 72 MPs elected. It was a triumph for leader Ed Davey. Since then, however, there has been growing restlessness over what many of his MPs feel has been a failure to capitalise on that performance, and fears that the party risks being squeezed out of the political picture.

The local elections in May produced mixed results for the Lib Dems. The party made a net gain of 224 councillors and took three councils from other parties. It was able to fend off Reform UK challenges in areas like Portsmouth, where it seized control of the city council, and made gains outside its traditional strongholds in areas such as Rugby and Ealing.

However, the results also showed that on average, the Lib Dems’ support was down by three points compared to 2022 and 2024, and they largely failed to make inroads in urban areas such as London, where a surge in support for the Green Party ate into Lib Dem votes.

Advertisement

While the party leadership hailed the 7 May results as an overall success, PoliticsHome can reveal that there is an acceptance among senior Lib Dems that it is time to look at changing the approach. To that end, the party is undergoing a strategy and policy overhaul, with key areas of discussion including the economy, welfare, and, as the 10th anniversary of the Brexit referendum approaches, a bolder stance on the European Union.

Speaking to PoliticsHome, Lib Dem MP Tom Gordon said that while the results last month were generally positive for his party, losses in the North that weren’t seen during the coalition years rang “alarm bells” for him.

For Gordon, the results were a “warning sign” that the Lib Dems have been operating in “a very cautious way” so far.

Advertisement

“I don’t think it was necessarily the wrong approach, but just given the nature and the timeline of where we’re at in this parliament and the political events and that fragmentation, I think there is now a rethinking of what we do, what we offer, how we’re more punchy, how we’re bolder, and what the offer from us is,” he told PoliticsHome.

The Lib Dems have tried to be bold before. The party’s adoption of the slogan “Bollocks to Brexit” in 2019 was an attempt to harness the anti-Brexit vote. But it fell flat. Seven years on, in a UK that is no longer a part of the EU, one senior Lib Dem MP told PoliticsHome, “the economy is stagnating, the trend is mediocre.”

There’s definitely a frustration that it feels like we’ve been talking about the same things – social care and rivers – and that just felt like we weren’t really moving forward

Advertisement

They felt that the party would need to announce EU policies that would be “eye-catching and bold”, with all options being considered. One senior MP said the outcome of those discussions would likely come before conference season.

The MP said the party is “starting to think about the economy in a much more structural manner”, and the frontbench team had been “set a task of properly scrutinising departmental budgets, [looking at] where money is being spent”.

They added that the party needs to “make sure we are economically credible”, with there being more appetite from figures at the top of the party towards thinking about what the Lib Dem offering would be in a potential future coalition.

Lib Dem MP and chair of the Commons Health and Social Care Committee, Layla Moran, told PoliticsHome: “There’s definitely a frustration that it feels like we’ve been talking about the same things – social care and rivers – and that just felt like we weren’t really moving forward.

“So us evolving the position and being quite mindful about how we do that now is really important.”

Advertisement

She added: “There are a lot of Lib Dem MPs geeking out on how we fix the deep issues that the country’s got, and we are going to come up with something that is quite bold and exciting and coherent.”

While Lib Dems like Gordon describe the process as a “rethink”, others are more reluctant to adopt that label, instead suggesting it is a natural evolution.

Daisy Cooper, Lib Dem deputy leader and Treasury spokesperson, told PoliticsHome the party was now looking at seats to target beyond just the so-called ‘Blue Wall’ – historically Conservative constituencies that have switched to the Lib Dems in recent years.

“Now that we have consolidated our existing seats, really our plan is very much to go out and to win more, but it’s not a change in direction, it’s just the next step.”

Advertisement

Whatever the official label of the process inside the party, the question of how the Lib Dems can cut through and make an impact in an increasingly fractured party system is a key concern. “It’s a massive challenge”, one senior party member told PoliticsHome, explaining it is often hard to achieve cut through with the Lib Dems’ characteristically “nuanced” policies.

As populist parties garner support, Gordon said the party cannot stand still. “There are people who are really cheesed off who are looking for alternatives, and we can’t miss the boat on that.

“We will be doing ourselves a disservice as a party unless we look to try and build that big tent that has an overarching strategy for the entirety of the country.”

The Liberal Democrats are also planning to prioritise championing environmentalism, in order to move into a space they say Zack Polanski’s Green Party is starting to abandon, according to The Telegraph.

Advertisement

Moran put it frankly: “We need to respond. We recognise that the strategy that we went into the general election with in 2024 is not the right strategy for now. And there’s a broad understanding of that across the party.”

Ed could easily have chosen the very tempting option to go full Polanski and become the populist Farage of the left

One senior Lib Dem told PoliticsHome that there is also an acceptance that they will need to be more “radical” in their policy making and “thinking more about what people wouldn’t expect us to do”. There is a broad consensus too that how these policies are then communicated to the public is key, with multiple sources telling PoliticsHome that the party is growing its social media teams in a bid to boost its digital operation.

Advertisement

Moran admitted that the party needs to be “better at selling [policy]”.

“That’s not just Ed – it’s all of us. We all need to get literate on social media; we all need to make this sexy again. We all need to understand how to sell this stuff in 30 seconds.”

Gordon, along with other Lib Dems, emphasised the need for his party to be “bold” and “popular” – but that while they wanted to “offer an alternative”, they want to find a “way to frame that in a way like we don’t want to burn the system down”. For many Lib Dem MPs, this means they want to see Davey continue as leader up until the next general election, despite criticisms that he could have done more to cut through with the public.

Lib Dem MP and former party leader Tim Farron told PoliticsHome: “Ed could easily have chosen the very tempting option to go full Polanski and become the populist Farage of the left.

“But [he] wisely and morally opted to be the party for sensible people. That’s a harder sell, but it’s the right move, so it involves a lot more work on the ground. But we are really good at that, and getting even better.”

Advertisement

One Lib Dem MP from the 2024 intake who wished to remain anonymous said: “We’ve been quieter than many would want us to be so far.

“If we get bolder and louder now, particularly on the economy, that opportunity to break through is still there for us.”

Newer MPs told PoliticsHome that they felt the party leadership had been engaging on how to move the party forward by meeting with backbench MPs, and carrying out extensive research via polling and data analysis.

Gordon told PoliticsHome: “I can understand why some colleagues have been frustrated that they don’t feel that’s happened so far. I am cautiously optimistic that that has been heard, and there will be some efforts to try and make sure that we do better, quite frankly, on that front.”

Advertisement

While calling for the party to consider how it might be involved in a future Westminster coalition was once a sign of rebellion, that line of thinking is now becoming more commonplace.

Gordon told PoliticsHome it was “absolutely” important to start thinking about policies for a coalition, and that the party would have that conversation going forward while also involving its members and affiliated organisations.

However, there is seemingly still a divide on this point, with senior party figures telling PoliticsHome that laying out options for a future coalition would be “indulgent naval gazing” when a general election is potentially still three years away, and that they should instead be focused on “the issues that really matter to people right now”.

 

Advertisement

Source link

Your Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has told the Canary that the Filton 24 activists convicted of criminal damage must not be sentenced as terrorists.

The Starmer regime insisted on retrying six activists. The jury had refused at the first trial to convict them on any of the state’s charges relating to damage to an Israeli-owned weapons factory, after police and security guards’ claims didn’t match CCTV evidence. At the retrial, security service-linked judge Jeremy Johnson banned any mention of the fact that the activists carried out their action to prevent the slaughter of Palestinian civilians. He also banned even the media from reporting that the defendants might be sentenced under terror legislation, despite no terror charges being brought against them.

Despite the attempts to stack the trial in the state’s favour, two of the activists were acquitted on all charges. None were convicted of any violent intent. Yet at the sentencing hearing next Friday, 12 June, the government is pressing for terror-related sentencing. This would mean much longer prison time and draconian conditions imposed on the young activists for decades even after release. These could include having to register their phones with the authorities, report on any relationships and obtain permission to travel.

Corbyn condemns attack on democracy and justice

Starmer is waging war on UK citizens’ rights to protect Israel and its interests. Corbyn, like a handful of other MPs, has condemned this attack on democracy and justice:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Canary (@thecanaryuk)

Sentences will be passed at Woolwich Crown Court and the group’s supporters have asked well-wishers to attend a protest outside the court to increase public awareness, and pressure on the authorities to do the right thing.

Featured image via Jordan Peck/Getty Images for SXSW London

By Skwawkbox

Source link

More than 3,000 people, including legal experts, have signed a formal complaint accusing the security service-linked presiding judge in the trial of six ‘Filton 24’ Palestine Action activists of bias and discriminatory conduct. The complaint comes in advance of a hearing on Monday 8 June on an application by the defendants for Jeremy Johnson’s removal from the case. Justice Jeremy Johnson on the grounds of apparent bias and abuses of process.

The jury had refused at the first trial to convict them on any of the state’s charges relating to damage to an Israeli-owned weapons factory, after police and security guards’ claims didn’t match CCTV evidence. At the retrial, security service-linked judge Jeremy Johnson banned any mention of the fact that the activists carried out their action to prevent the slaughter of Palestinian civilians. He banned lawyers from telling jurors of their legal right to acquit. Johnson even banned the media from reporting that the defendants might be sentenced under terror legislation — despite no terror charges being brought against them.

Despite the attempts to stack the trial in the state’s favour, two of the activists were acquitted on all charges. None were convicted of any violent intent. Yet at the sentencing hearing next Friday, 12 June, the government is pressing for terror-related sentencing. This would mean much longer prison time and draconian conditions imposed on the young activists for decades even after release. These could include having to register their phones with the authorities, report on any relationships and obtain permission to travel.

Filton 24 — “Manipulating the law”

The complaint signatories say the terror sentencing plan treats the defendants like Ahmed Hassan, the so-called “Parsons Green bomber”. Hassan is the only other person ever to be sentenced under UK law. Not charged with a terrorism offence yet sentenced as a terrorist. Hassan has received a life sentence in 2018 for a London Underground bombing that injured 51 people. The jury acquitted all the Filton defendants of any violent intent. The plan to sentence non-violent activists as terrorists “reveals [Johnson’s] loss of judgment and a discriminatory mindset towards the defendants”.

The complaint adds that by (unsuccessfully) prosecuting defence lawyer Rajiv Menon for contempt of court — Menon had defied Johnson’s restriction on what he could tell the jury — Johnson “had a prejudicial impact on the defendants”. Johnson also failed to deal with prejudicial statements by government ministers. Maud Dromgoole, who served as a juror in the first trial, said that the state was “manipulating the law” to make examples of the defendants.

The experts conclude that, added to Johnson’s “cruel and vindictive” treatment of the accused, his actions:

amount to a pattern of exceptional, biased and discriminatory conduct on the part of the judge.

Featured image via FiltonActionists

By Skwawkbox

Source link

The owner of Polish football club Pogoń Szczecin has refused to discuss the sale of players to Israeli club Maccabi Tel Aviv. Alex Haditaghi went further, comparing the idea of doing business with the club to trading with nazi Germany.

In a post on X, Haditaghi said he had told the Israeli club he would not be talking to them about potential transfers for defenders Dmitri Keramitsis and Leo Borges. He said that football should represent “hope, respect, unity and humanity” and that:

money, business, and opportunity must come second to conscience.

Haditaghi made clear that he was referring to Israel’s genocide in Gaza and its attacks on Lebanon and Iran — the “violent, genocidal and inhuman actions of the Israeli state”. His full statement reads:

My Official Response to Maccabi Tel Aviv F.C.

Dear Chairman,

Advertisement

Thank you for your interest in doing business with Pogoń Szczecin and for your interest in our players, Léo Borges and Dimitrios Keramitsis.

I have always believed that sport should bring people together. Football should be bigger than politics, bigger than borders, and bigger than division. It should represent hope, respect, unity, and humanity.

However, there are moments in history when silence becomes complicity, and when money, business, and opportunity must come second to conscience.

Considering the ongoing suffering of innocent civilians in Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, and across the region, and considering the violent, genocidal and inhuman actions of the Israeli state, I do not believe it would be morally right for our club to proceed with any business transaction with a club representing Israel at this time.

Advertisement

My responsibility as Chairman & Owner is not only to protect the financial interests of our club. It is also to protect the values, principles, and humanity that our club must stand for.

Had I been alive during the times of Nazi Germany, one of the darkest chapters of history, I would not have done business with any sports club representing Nazi Germany, a regime that was responsible for mass murder and crimes against millions of innocent people.

Today, I must apply the same moral standard.

There are moments when ethics must be stronger than profit and money. There are moments when humanity must be more important than business and money. This is one of those moments.

Advertisement

For that reason, with respect, we will not proceed with negotiations at this time.

I hope one day football & sports can again be only about football. But until innocent people are protected, until humanity is respected, and until the world stops accepting the unacceptable, we must stand on the side of conscience.

Sincerely,

Alex Haditaghi
Chairman
Pogoń Szczecin

Advertisement

Pogoń Szczecin vs Thugs and terrorists

Maccabi Tel Aviv fans are notorious thugs who rampage through rival cities in Israel and Europe chanting about the rape and murder of Palestinians and Arabs generally. The UK government has shamed itself by defending the thugs and attacking those who condemn them. Dutch authorities have classified Israel as a security risk after the racist mob destroyed parts of Amsterdam and attacked innocent bystanders. UEFA and even Israeli authorities have banned the club from key fixtures.

Israel is a terror state. Pogoń Szczecin is now Skwawkbox’s Polish club.

Featured image via Sport1

By Skwawkbox

Source link

The 2026 local election in the Merseyside borough of Sefton saw a left-wing surge against Labour. And the positive relationship between community independents and the Green Party made a meaningful difference, with both increasing their voice on the council as a result.

Community independents went from one councillor to five, and the Greens from one to three. And the Canary spoke to Lydiate and Maghull Community Independents to hear more about how they became the third biggest political grouping on Sefton Council.

Common-sense relationships on the left can make a big difference

There are places in the UK where local independents are more likely to win than the Greens, and vice versa. But in some places, vote splitting between them has allowed Labour to keep a hold.

Sefton, however, largely bucked that trend. Because while some polls predicted Reform would make big advances in Sefton, it didn’t. And one reason for that was coordination between left-wing independents and Greens.

New Lydiate and Maghull Community Independents councillor Joanne McCall described how the local Greens “stepped aside for us”. She said she has “a lot of respect” for Neil Doolin, previously Sefton’s lone Green councillor and now its group leader on the council. And she explained that, following conversations between the parties:

They stepped aside for community independents in three wards, which was ours [Maghull East], Lydiate and Maghull West, and Aintree and Maghull South.

Both McCall and current group leader David Leatherbarrow won in Maghull East. In a close race, Labour won the other seat.

In Lydiate and Maghull West, meanwhile, all three independents won fairly comfortably.

The three candidates for Aintree and Maghull South Community Independents didn’t win, but were serious challengers to second-place Reform.

McCall said she felt “eternally grateful” for the Green decision to step aside, as it avoided any potential vote splitting between Lydiate and Maghull Community Independents and the Greens. This decision, she suggested, was a sensible acknowledgement that:

the two-party system, I think, is well and truly out the window now

She added:

I’m truly pleased that they recognised our potential

Leatherbarrow agreed, telling us:

For them to step aside was unbelievable – to see that they did run in every single area, and then when there was a community-independent group they stepped aside. It just showed that it was more important for grassroots activists to get into power, rather than to allow Reform to get in or to stick with the same old from Labour.

With trust in Labour collapsing, accountable community power is a real alternative

McCall described how politics has changed locally in recent years, saying:

I’ve been involved for the last three years with the Lydiate and Maghull Community Independents, and this is the third election that I’ve run in… There has been a real shift in the support for independents, and I think that there’s a few factors that contribute to that. The first one would be loss of faith in Labour nationally… Also, obviously, the surge of Reform… You’ve got that portion of the community who absolutely does not want Reform to get in, because they don’t agree with their policies.

But also the fact that we’ve worked for the last three years, locally. Everybody knows us because we’re visible. We’re invested in the community, so we do a lot of volunteering work. We’ve done a lot of initiatives to bring things to the area.

Leatherbarrow, meanwhile, captured the essence of the community independent message, explaining how local interactions work. He said:

We’ve tried to bring the residents with us – to say ‘right, we live here. This is what we think. What do you think?’

We put on a few community meetings… We just asked people, ‘what do you think, and how would you solve the problem?’ And the community came up with the solutions. It wasn’t us. It was the community that came up with the solutions. It’s then our job to go away and solve the problems.

McCall summed the message up as:

Local people know what local people want.

And these people have “had enough” of representatives of mainstream parties either ignoring them or just disappearing when they win:

It just seems to be a recurring pattern right across the country that candidates go into these elections and then literally just disappear once they’ve got in. We will never do that. We’re active and visible in the community.

It’s important that people can see what you’re doing.

People have actually realised that they prefer a local person to represent them rather than the line of a national party.

The pledges that seemed to resonate most with people locally were:

Visibility, transparency, protecting our green spaces, and accountability.

Leatherbarrow also mentioned the key issue of unfair planning, asserting that:

Overdevelopment in the area has outpaced the infrastructure. So the infrastructure’s been the same for about 30-40 years, but the number of houses being built is just exponential.

Not just in Sefton — We need to see more of this nationally

In the Waterloo ward of Sefton, meanwhile, the Green Party had a comfortable clean sweep (at least 500 votes ahead of Labour). That’s where their first councillor, Doolin, had won previously. And they built on his record there. Upon winning, the new Green group promised to be “community-led”, with Doolin insisting:

We’re determined to be visible, hardworking councillors who listen to residents

No community independents challenged the Greens in Waterloo.

Overall, Sefton’s local election offered some hope. It showed that, where community independents, Greens, and other left-wingers can get along and coordinate, they can organise more efficiently to defeat national right-wing parties like Labour and Reform. And they can make real advances.

We need to see a lot more of this across the whole country.

Featured image viaTheGuideLiverpool

By Ed Sykes

Source link

The US National Security Agency (NSA) is allegedly using Anthropic software to wage cyberwar against Iran and China. The AI war firm is currently locked in a legal battle with the Trump administration to stop certain military uses. Anthropic bosses previously complained when their tech was used in the 3 January Venezuela raid.

The NSA is the US equivalent of the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). Its remit includes surveillance and cyberwarfare.

The Financial Times (FT) reported on 4 June:

Anthropic is helping the US National Security Agency deploy its powerful Mythos AI model for offensive cyber operations, embedding engineers inside the agency despite an ongoing legal battle with the Pentagon.

Adding:

The San Francisco-based company had installed about half a dozen staff within the NSA as so-called forward-deployed engineers to guide the use of the technology and customise models for specific applications, two people familiar with the arrangement said.

But the embedding suggests that Anthropic is contravening its own rules. As the Canary reported in February 2026:

Anthropic has strict rules on military usage… usage guidelines prohibit Claude [an Anthropic software] from being used to facilitate violence, develop weapons or conduct surveillance.

Mythos is Anthropic’s most advanced AI system. The firm has said:

Mythos is too dangerous to release publicly.

The FT said:

It remains unclear whether Anthropic’s engineers are assisting the NSA in active operations. However, one person close to the situation said Mythos would be useful for infiltrating the networks of nations such as China or Iran.

A source close to the firm said:

The best way to build a good defence is to build a good attack.

If [Mythos] is not used to build attack agents, adversaries will find a way to do it.

Anthropic’s row with Trump and Hegseth

The row between Anthropic and the Trump administration has been so intense that defence secretary Pete Hegseth threatened to take over the technology by diktat. He even pledged to designate the firm as a ‘supply chain risk’ in February 2026 if bosses did not comply with a demand to:

give the military unfettered access to its Claude AI model by Friday evening or else have the government label it a “risk” to the supply chain.

The designation is:

typically reserved for foreign firms with ties to U.S. adversaries, could ban companies that work with the government from partnering with Anthropic.

Anthropic responded:

No amount of intimidation or punishment from the Department of War will change our position on mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous weapons. We will challenge any supply chain risk designation in court.

Beijing is clearly a target for US AI operations. The FT said that in February 2026:

the Pentagon was seeking to create AI-powered cyber tools to identify infrastructure targets in China as part of an effort to improve US capabilities in any future military conflict with Beijing.

And on 2 June:

President Donald Trump signed an executive order outlining a voluntary framework in which AI companies can submit their new models for security reviews before they are publicly released.

Anthropic software also meshes with Palantir technology in some US uses. The Canary reported with regard to the January 2026 US attack on Venezuela:

The deployment of Claude occurred through Anthropic’s partnership with data company Palantir Technologies, whose tools are commonly used by the Defense Department and federal law enforcement.

Anthropic’s programs can be used:

for everything from summarizing documents to controlling autonomous drones.

The UK is deeply and dangerously enmeshed with Palantir. The Commons technology committee warned on 3 June that the UK should divest from Palantir, which has taken over swathes of British national infrastructure.

Anthropic (at least rhetorically) subscribes to a form of corporate ethics. Palantir’s vision is openly far-right. That said, there should be no place for AI firms in intelligence, warfare, surveillance or policing — whatever the ideology their CEO claims to follow.

Featured image via Chance Yeh/Getty Images for HubSpot

By Joe Glenton

Source link

Campaign groups have voiced shock and outrage at the “biggest rollback of disability rights in a generation” following a Supreme Court ruling concerning individuals who lack the capacity to consent to their living arrangements.

In a joint statement, the charities Mencap, Mind, and the National Autistic Society warned that the regressive ruling could see hundreds of thousands of severely disabled people lose fundamental human rights protections. They added that:

By removing independent checks, advocacy, and automatic access to legal aid, the Court has closed the gateway to justice and support for many who need it most. Stripping away these safeguards makes it easier for abuse and neglect to go unnoticed behind closed doors.

A litany of previous wrongdoings demonstrates how closed cultures, lack of independent oversight and restrictive care can lead to abuse scandals and decisions like this fly in the face of everything we’ve learnt.

Supreme Court — Dismantling Cheshire West

The court’s verdict, delivered on 2 June, dismantles a landmark legal framework known as ‘Cheshire West’. The framework was established by another legal ruling back in 2014. The common understanding of Cheshire West held that:

an individual without such mental capacity is treated as unable to give valid consent to confinement.

As such, community care confinement would only be legal with a court protection order. Alternatively, the state could provide permission under the ‘Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards’ (DoLS) scheme. This necessitated a special “acid test” which, as the Mencap statement explained, meant that:

if someone lacks the mental capacity to consent to their care and living arrangements, is under continuous supervision and control, and is not free to leave, they were legally ‘deprived of their liberty’.

This triggered vital legal safeguards requiring an independent assessor to regularly inspect care homes, supported living arrangements, and locked units to ensure the placement is safe, justified, and in the person’s best interests.

Those vital legal guardrails were known as ‘Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards’ (DoLS). However, Tuesday’s decision “tears up those protections”.

Northern Ireland’s case

The attorney general for Northern Ireland, Tony McGleenan KC, brought the case which triggered the new UK-wide ruling.

Led byMinister of Health Mike Nesbitt, the NI government questioned the definition of “deprivation of liberty” under article 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for adults lacking the capacity to consent to their living situation.

The attorney general submitted arguments claiming both that the original Cheshire West decision was incorrect, and that it created an undue administrative burden. That is to say, the NI government argued, successfully, that ensuring the liberty of the severely disabled cost too much.

The 2014 ruling meant that DoLS referrals rose from 13,700 to 322,455 in the decade leading up to 2024. In turn, this led to a 123,790-case backlog. As the Disability News Service (DNS) reported, this week’s ruling will likely see those referrals fall dramatically. Writing for DNS, John Pring added that:

Cheshire West led to the drawing-up of the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) system, based on a report by the Law Commission.

The last government had originally planned to bring in LPS in October 2020, but its implementation was repeatedly delayed by Conservative ministers.

Advertisement

Care minister Stephen Kinnock announced last October that there would be a new consultation on the new LPS system “in the first half of next year”.

It is not yet clear where this week’s judgement leaves this consultation.

Supreme Court — Devaluing fundamental rights

The new ruling establishes that, for the purposes of the ECHR, a lack of legal capacity is not synonymous with a lack of valid consent. Instead, as the Mencap joint statement put it:

The Court implies that individuals with profound cognitive disabilities cannot be “deprived” of liberty because their condition limits their ability to experience it—a view that devalues their fundamental rights.

Meanwhile, in borderline cases, the Supreme Court would only consider a care facility to deprive an individual of their liberty if it closely resembled a prison.

Likewise, if the individual appears passive and unprotesting, the law will treat this as consent. This aspect of the ruling would apply even in situations where they are routinely restrained or sedated, whether physically or chemically.

In practice, this is likely to mean that the overwhelming majority of current independent DoLS inspections will be cancelled. As the three charities explained, the human impacts will be vast, across both the healthcare and social care settings. They gave practical examples, including:

If an autistic person with high support needs, someone with a serious mental illness, or a person with a severe learning disability is locked in a care setting and sedated, but does not actively protest, they will no longer be considered “confined” by the state. They will lose their automatic right to independent reviews, a legal advocate, and protection from closed care cultures.

For example, in psychiatric and crisis wards, if an individual experiencing a severe psychiatric crisis, acute psychosis, or clinical depression is admitted to a mental health hospital ward as an “informal patient,” they frequently lack the mental capacity to consent to their stay and therefore do not have any of the protections of independent reviews.

A plea to government

Mencap, Mind and the National Autistic Society also issued a plea directly the UK government. They called upon it to “act with urgency”:

to issue interim guidance to local authorities and health and care providers to prevent them being plunged into chaos by this ruling. It should urgently bring in new laws and guidance that strengthens protections for some of the people who are most at risk. This should include clearly explaining how disabled people and their families can challenge breaches of their rights and get the advocacy and support they need.

As always, as human rights continue to erode across the UK, it is the most vulnerable, those who can’t defend themselves, who become the first targets.

However, when a government — without any apparent show of remorse — can make an argument that ensuring liberty costs too much, we are all very much in danger.

However, the three charities ended their missive with a show of solidarity:

To the many people that will be affected by this ruling now and in the future, we stand with you and you are not alone. This decision devalues the rights and dignity of disabled people in this country.

Featured image via Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link

During the Naksa, meaning “setback” in Arabic, “Israel” changed the lives of all Palestinians — entrenching them in a system of military control and apartheid that remains today. This war, fought in 1967, brought Palestinians displacement, occupation and loss, expanded on a scale not seen since the Nakba of 1948, when the Jewish state was formed.

During the Six Day War — or Naksa — 300,000 Palestinians were forcibly displaced by ‘Israel’

It began on 5 June, when “Israel” launched surprise attacks against Egypt and quickly entered a conflict involving Jordan and Syria. By the time the fighting ended, six days later, the criminal regime had devastated its Arab neighbours. It had also seized and occupied the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and Syria’s Golan Heights. Although victory was swift for “Israel,” for Palestinians the effects of the Naksa are ongoing.

“Israel” committed numerous atrocities during the six days of its June 1967 war. Israeli occupation forces (IOF) forcibly displaced 300,000 Palestinians from Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem during this time. Most escaped into Jordan. A large number of the displaced had already fled or lost their homes in 1948. Families who had spent almost twenty years rebuilding their lives in refugee camps suddenly found themselves uprooted again.

Around 10,000 Palestinians were displaced from the Latrun area of the West Bank. This included the villages of Imwas, Yalo, and Bayt Nuba, which were then demolished shortly after the war. Although residents in one of the villages held up white flags to show they had surrendered, the IOF killed 18 elderly Palestinians who did not evacuate their homes.

In June 1967, criminal “Israel” demolished West Bank villages, carried out cultural genocide in East Jerusalem, and executed prisoners of war

The occupation aimed to erase these villages from historical memory and hide its crimes. So it then developed parts of the area into a recreational park, and called it Canada Park. It was funded by the Jewish National Fund of Canada.

The same thing was done in 1948, when the occupation destroyed more than 400 Palestinian villages. Aujjar village was demolished, then had British Park built over its remains.

The occupation also carried out cultural genocide in 1967. Immediately after capturing East Jerusalem, the IOF ordered the complete demolition of the historic Mughrabi Quarter. This was an 800-year-old neighbourhood in the Old City, and was completely demolished by the IOF, over just two nights- of June 10–11, 1967.

800 years of history and culture had been erased. 138 Palestinian homes were bulldozed and more than 650 residents forcibly displaced. The purpose of this destruction was to broaden the alley leading to the Western Wall, and clear space in front of it. A spacious plaza was then created, to accommodate tens of thousands of Jewish worshippers, now that East Jerusalem had been captured.

IOF crimes during the Naksa also included the killing of Egyptian prisoners of war. In September 1995, Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram reported that two mass graves had been discovered in the Sinai Peninsula. This contained the remains of 30 to 60 Egyptian prisoners of war and unarmed civilians. The victims were shot or executed by the IOF after they had surrendered.

One former Egyptian soldier, and eyewitness reportedly said:“I saw a line of prisoners, civilian and military, and they [the Israelis] opened fire at them all at once. When they were dead, they told us to bury them.” This occurred on 6 and 7 June.

Palestinians in West Bank remained under military rule since the 1967 Naksa

The occupation that emerged after 1967 completely altered Palestinian life. “Israel” established military administration over the West Bank and Gaza, placing millions of Palestinians under direct military rule. Checkpoints, permit systems and land seizures became features of everyday existence. These have continued unabated to this day. The Israeli occupation wasted no time, and established its first illegal settlement, Kfar Etzion, just months after the June War.

Land theft and settlement expansion go hand in hand, and are now taking place at an unprecedented rate. But these settlements are illegal under international law. Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory. Around 750,000 of these zionist colonisers are currently living in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

The occupation has evolved into an apartheid system that is not only designed to control territory and the population. The intention is also to fragment Palestinian society and prevent the emergence of a viable independent Palestinian state.

The Naksa and the Nakba which preceded it, represent successive stages in a history of dispossession. The Nakba saw the mass displacement of Palestinians during the creation of Israel in 1948, while the Naksa extended this catastrophe by bringing the rest of historic Palestine under Israeli occupation control.

As the Palestinian historian Rashid Khalidi argues, 1967 was not just another military defeat. It was a turning point that reshaped Palestinian political identity and intensified demands for self-determination.

Continued dispossession and resistance

Nearly sixty years later, the consequences of the Naksa are still with Palestinians. Refugees remain scattered throughout the Middle East and elsewhere. East Jerusalem is rapidly being judaized, while Palestinian homes continue being demolished. And the illegal Israeli occupation keeps going despite all the criticism.

For Palestinians living in the occupied territory, the events of June 1967 are reflected in restrictions on movement, disputes over land and their continuing struggle for national rights.

The legacy of the six day war has endured across generations, and the occupation continues to shape the political, social and geographical realities of Palestine. Palestinians will remember the Naksa not only as a historical event, but as an ongoing experience of dispossession and resistance.

Featured image via Middle East Monitor 

By Charlie Jaay

Source link

LAYUP: The New York Knicks are in the NBA finals, and politicians can’t seem to get enough of it.

They’re hosting invite-only watch parties as an excuse to butter up the political press and cash in on the cultural cachet.

They’re deploying taxpayer-funded staff to film and edit Knicks-focused social media clips of themselves, fit with music, multiple shooting locations and a whole lot of hype.

And they’re even mocking up government documents in an effort to spread good vibes — and good publicity — around New York’s basketball team.

It feels like Empire State’s electeds are jumping at every opportunity they can to graft their political brands onto a once-in-a-generation milestone for the Knickerbockers, and it’s happening everywhere you look.

“There is a real unique hunger that is both exciting and unifying about this year and this run that a lot of candidates are trying to tap into,” said Matt Rey, a Democratic operative with Red Horse Strategies. “It’s really hard to reach people on anything live now, except for sports, and this is the height of it, especially for a local area … Any way that you can advertise during, before, after games in the finals is the best chance you have to reach the most amount of Democratic primary voters, bar none.”

Mayor Zohran Mamdani got in on that opportunity Wednesday night when he starred in a commercial that aired during Game 1 and featured the mayor’s three favored congressional candidates dishing the rock to each other as if they left their day jobs to become full-time hoopers.

He also revealed this morning he’ll be at Monday night’s game, and paying for his own ticket — which will cost the former rent-stabilized tenant a pretty penny.

President Donald Trump also plans to attend, and Mamdani demurred when asked if he was invited to sit with the president or plans on holding some sort of in-person meeting while Trump is in town.

“I’ll keep the nature of those conversations between the two of us,” Mamdani told 1010 WINS.

The mayor is making his Knicks fandom known in other ways, like drafting up an executive order allowing kids to stay up past their bedtimes to watch the Knicks (It’s the law, mom!), inviting the San Antonio Spurs’ center Victor Wembanyama to participate in the next Charter Revision Commission meeting, and commissioning Knicks-themed art for City Hall’s rotunda and steps.

Other more staid politicians are getting in on it too. Crime-prosecuting Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg happily turned his press conference about the indictment of a brazen retail theft ring into an opportunity to talk Knicks basketball.

And the irreverent Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar posted an AI graphic of herself with two of the team’s star players, as if the three are all pals.

“New York, it’s time. Let’s. Go. Knicks. 🏀” she said.

Then there’s the bets: the cliched wagers between elected officials from different cities, where the losing team’s city or state’s quintessential food is sent to the winning team’s supporters. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is betting Texas Sen. Ted Cruz slices of Joe’s Pizza and some Brooklyn Lager — and she’ll get to down Texas BBQ if the orange-and-blue win. Nick LaLota is betting a 6-foot hero on the Knicks winning, in a wager with a Texas congressman. And the New York City Council is putting bagels on the line in a wager against the breakfast-taco-eating San Antonio City Council.

For those electeds considering whether or not to jump in on the trend, Rey, the Knicks-fan-turned-Dem-operative, has some advice: “Don’t be a bandwagon fan.”

“If you’re into this run, go all for it, because this is exciting to you, and is part of what makes you unique, but if it doesn’t make you unique, find something else,” he said.

Gov. Kathy Hochul, for her part, isn’t betting anything. She shut the door on any friendly wager with the Lone Star State after the Texas Gov. Greg Abbott published an AI-generated image of dunking on Hochul.

For Hochul, a famous Bills fan, the bar for glomming onto — and embracing — any sort of athletic energy that engrosses New York is low.

“I’m fired up,” she said at a press conference Thursday, where both the World Cup and NBA Finals were discussed. “I’m excited about this. I’m a huge sports fan, whatever it is. If there’s a ball involved, I love it.”

From the Capitol

THE LEGISLATIVE FINALE: The annual legislative session is crawling to a close with the Assembly spending today chipping away at its final package of bills.

The Senate concluded its business at 1:30 this morning. Assemblymembers are expecting to wrap up this evening — but optimism that the final buzzer will sound before the Knicks tip off at 8:30 p.m. is ebbing.

A good chunk of the final day was spent unanimously passing a bill from Assemblymember Alex Bores that would impose regulations on how AI chatbots interact with minors. The bots would be banned from engaging in sexually explicit conduct or encouraging kids to commit suicide.

“If you cannot make chatbots safe for children, you should not make them available to children,” said Bores, who’s running in a hotly-contested congressional primary. “I cannot think of a more appropriate bill to be my final bill in the chamber.”

The Assembly also debated a constitutional amendment that would move elections such as upstate mayoral contests and district attorney races to even-numbered years.

Democrats have argued the shifts will improve turnout in under-the-radar races and save money since polling sites will be opened less often. It’s much easier for voters “to put their energy into these elections all at once, instead of being stressed out every year about different offices,” Assemblymember Sarahana Shrestha said.

Republicans have long opposed this, as well as 2023 legislation that moved most town and county races to even-numbered years, saying the shifts will politicize elections that should be decided by who’s best at managing snow plows.

“This is blatant power grab number four,” Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski said, summarizing a week when Democrats also passed measures on congressional redistricting, judicial redistricting and ending the bipartisan Board of Elections’ power to choose the wording for referenda.

“All of those are very partisan attacks on the integrity of our democratic institutions,” Sempolinski said. “What the people back home want us focused on is making their lives better, making their lives more affordable, not what we’re doing — which is the Democratic Party seizing more power for itself.” — Bill Mahoney

FROM CITY HALL

OVERKILL: A new report from City Comptroller Mark Levine found the majority of NYPD overtime — an outlay that routinely costs the city around $1 billion annually — comes from events that are known well in advance and could be better planned for.

“Overtime spending has been a clear cost the NYPD wants to rein in, especially as New York City seeks to reduce recurring expenses in light of projected budget gaps,” Levine said in a statement accompanying today’s report. “Overtime should be used when absolutely necessary to enable police officers to keep communities safe.”

During last year’s mayoral campaign, Mamdani pledged to rein in OT spending that has regularly been underbudgeted in the city’s annual spending plan, creating an unwelcome and pricey surprise when the bill comes due.

In the current fiscal year set to end June 30, Levine projects NYPD overtime costs will reach $890 million, the third-highest year on record.

To rein in costs, Levine suggested the department better manage staffing for parades, quality-of-life initiatives and other predictable events to prioritize regular shifts. He also recommended holding specific commands accountable when they routinely blow their overtime budgets, mandating rest periods for officers who work extended shifts to avoid fatigue and creating a more comprehensive accountability structure that could be audited.

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch has pledged to get a better grip on overtime spending too, and Levine’s report suggested that her efforts have produced some preliminarily positive results.

But a confluence of summer events including the World Cup, the NBA finals and celebrations for America’s 250th anniversary are expected to add around $92 million to the NYPD’s overtime budget for the upcoming fiscal year, though some of that will be covered by federal dollars.

At a recent City Council hearing, where Tisch said the department’s overtime spending has also gone up because of salary increases and general inflation, she pledged to balance the demands on the department with the fiscal goals of the comptroller and mayor.

“This uniquely busy period will lead to an increase in overtime spend,” she said. “However, this increase does not change our overtime management plan or our priority to ensure the safety of all New Yorkers while being a responsible fiscal steward.” — Joe Anuta

PENN DRAMA: Rep. Jerry Nadler is fuming over legislation pushed by a developer selected to redo Penn Station.

Before Amtrak picked Halmar to overhaul Penn in May, the developer shopped a bill on Capitol Hill to allow the railroad to benefit from nearby commercial development.

The effect of the legislation would be to supplant a now-paused deal between the state and midtown developers, including Vornado, to fund billions of dollars in upgrades to the rail hub using so-called payment in lieu of taxes, or PILOT, incentives. Under the bill, the developers could strike a deal with the Trump administration and make payments to Amtrak, cutting out New York officials. The head of Vornado, Steve Roth, is a former business associate of the president’s.

Nadler was the only member to vote against the idea in committee when it was attached as an amendment to a surface transportation bill. The Democrat dinged the plan as a giveaway to developers and an effort to bypass local accountability.

“This is a handout to Donald Trump and his real estate buddies, and New Yorkers will pay the price,” Nadler said in a statement to POLITICO.

Halmar, which Amtrak awarded master development rights to in May, approached Nadler in mid-March with bill language. That was after Amtrak had floated the idea of using PILOT incentives to help it pay for the new Penn Station — but before Halmar was tapped as the winning developer.

The amendment was introduced by Rep. Addison McDowell (R-N.C.) and backed in committee by Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.). Both see the bill, which has broad language that applies outside of New York, as a way to make it easier for Amtrak to fund upgrades across the country.

“This is maybe the first time I’ve ever heard a Democrat not support Amtrak making these kinds of decisions,” Moulton said as he and Nadler briefly sparred over the amendment during a May 21 hearing.

Halmar declined to comment. A spokesperson for Vornado did not respond to a request for comment.

It remains unclear whether other Democrats will come out swinging against the idea, which supporters say could help speed up development around mass transit hubs — an idea that’s generally appealing to Democrats. — Ry Rivard

FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL

DEBATE-A-PALOOZA: One of the city’s suddenly most competitive races will be getting a high-profile debate before the primary.

Rep. Adriano Espaillat and Darializa Avila Chevalier — his Mamdani-backed challenger — will take the stage on June 17 for a debate hosted by Telemundo 47/WNJU. Theo Chino-Tavarez and Oscar Romero, two other candidates vying for the seat, will appear as well.

The debate will be conducted exclusively in Spanish. Hispanic residents make up around half of the district, which includes parts of upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

The primary has heated up since Mamdani weighed in for Avila Chevalier last week. On Friday, a day after a testy forum on WNYC between Espaillat and Avila Chevalier, both campaigns held events in Harlem touting their respective progressive backing. — Madison Fernandez

IN OTHER NEWS

— BATTLEGROUND: Espaillat and Avila Chevalier are intensifying outreach to Harlem’s Black electorate, a crucial bloc in the closely watched primary fight. (The New York Times)

— ‘BLINDSIDED’: Parents of trans children say Mount Sinai plans to share records of children receiving gender-affirming care with the Trump administration. (Gothamist)

— MR. MET: Ali Najmi, former election attorney to Mamdani and head of NYC’s commission to select local judges, is now working for billionaire Mets owner Steve Cohen. (Hell Gate)

Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.

Source link