Politics
Burnham’s appointments speak louder than his words
When it comes to politicians, senior appointments often tell you more than public pronouncements. Andy Burnham has only been Prime Minister for two weeks, but he has just installed one of the most pro-establishment cabinets in Labour Party history.
From Defence Minister to Chancellor
John Healey’s resignation as Defence Minister, prompted by Keir Starmer’s refusal to plough more of the national budget into military spending, directly precipitated the downfall of Burnham’s predecessor.
In August 2024, Healey, a long-time supporter of Labour Friends of Israel, met with Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant to discuss preserving “intelligence co-operation”.
Burnham just made him Chancellor of the Exchequer, the most senior role in his cabinet.
Miliband’s return
Ed Miliband also received a significant role, and is now in charge of Burnham’s foreign policy. Labour Friends of Israel were one of the first to offer their congratulations.
In 2014, Miliband took an LFI-funded trip to occupied Palestine alongside Jennifer Gerber, a former special adviser to Burnham who is still a director of LFI today.
Miliband met with both Benjamin Netanyahu and Isaac Herzog. Gerber said at the time:
It was a privilege for Labour Friends of Israel to join.
Miliband was joined on the trip by Douglas Alexander, another Burnham cabinet pick. In 2013, speaking alongside then Israeli ambassador Daniel Taub at LFI’s annual lunch, Alexander said that the settler state should be “celebrated” and called for deepened ties.
Dan Jarvis, security minister
Burnham ally Dan Jarvis is another long-time supporter of the LFI. In May, he spoke at an event celebrating the 1948 ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, declaring that the Labour Party:
has long been an advocate of the Jewish state.
In June, it was reported that Jarvis had:
made himself available to deliver speeches at functions put on by the Board of Deputies and other communal organisations in the Westminister [sic].
After Healey resigned, Starmer had promoted Jarvis to Defence Secretary. Now, Burnham has moved him back to Security Minister.
Diana Johnson, health minister
Diana Johnson is a current Labour Friends of Israel vice-chair. In 2021, she praised Starmer’s speech at the LFI annual lunch and claimed that:
support for Israel…[is not] the preserve of any one wing or faction in the party.
Burnham just appointed her as a Minister in the Department of Health.
Wes Streeting, defence minister
In 2022, Wes Streeting was the first member of Starmer’s shadow cabinet to accept an LFI-funded trip. On July 13th, he registered yet another £14,500 worth of “donations” from veteran pro-Israeli lobbyist Trevor Chinn.
Burnham has made him Defence Minister.
Dan Tomlinson, cabinet secretary
In 2024, Dan Tomlinson received £6250 from Chinn, and ex-LFI director Jonathan Mendelsohn gave another £2000 through his Red Capital Ltd. firm.
Burnham just made him a cabinet secretary.
Jo White, Home Office minister
Jo White is another vice-chair of Labour Friends of Israel, who last week published a new paper suggesting that a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements is:
practically and politically impossible.
In 2024, White received “donations” from a string of lobbyists: £8350 from Chinn, £5000 from Stuart Roden, and £2000 from Trevor Pears.
Burnham just made her a Home Office minister.
John Mann, antisemitism advisor
White is married to John Mann, the ex-Labour MP for her Bassetlaw seat.
In 2017, Mann accepted £5000 from then Labour Together director Chinn. In 2013, he was hosted by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Now, he is Burnham’s Antisemitism Adviser.
Israeli lobby has nothing to worry about
Starmer’s Justice Minister, David Lammy, has been replaced by Alex Norris, another supporter of Labour Friends of Israel. LFI stalwart Pat McFadden and gambling advocate Fiona Twycross have also joined the cabinet.
Burnham has wasted no time in reversing the stale image of Starmer’s failed administration. Behind the social media gloss, however, his appointments tell a truer tale: the lobby has nothing to worry about.
Featured image via the Canary
Politics
6 Ways This Hot Summer Has Put A Strain On The UK Way Of Living
This summer of heatwaves has made the climate crisis impossible to avoid for most Brits as temperatures continue to break records.
Andy Burnham’s government has pledged to help bring down the cost of living, but ministers have been remarkably quiet over the consequences of this excessively hot summer.
A spate of record-breaking heatwaves have swept across Europe and the UK is currently in the middle of its third drought in five years.
The Green Party has urged the prime minister to hold an emergency COBRA meeting on how to meet this challenge – and it’s far from the only voice calling for action.
Here’s a look at what’s at stake as the stifling summer continues.
1. Food Shortages
The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) warned on Sunday that food shortages could be on the horizon following periods of extreme weather.
NFU president Tom Bradshaw told the BBC the government should give farmers tax breaks to build water storage systems on their lands.
Winter floods made it difficult to sow seeds and the current drought means any crops which were planted are struggling to grow.
Wheat is growing to just half its normal height and farmers across England have been forced to harvest earlier in the year to salvage what remains.
The climate impacts, together with the loss of EU-derived subsidies which protected farming, means that a third of British farmers are now making a loss or narrowly breaking even.
Livestock farmers are struggling as well due to low grass growth, and are resorting to using their winter supplies.
The issue stretches to farms around the world. Bradshaw warned the countries which we rely on for food are also facing changing climates.
These pressures have driven the price of fresh food up. Wholesale tomatoes have risen in price by more than 60%, iceberg lettuce by 90%, and potatoes by more than 40%.
2. Water Supply
The Met Office reported England had just 8% of its average July rainfall last month.
It is expected to be recorded as the driest July to date. In some parts of the country, it has not rained in more than a month.
Approximately 23 million people across England and Wales are under a hosepipe ban now, and to top it off, there’s also been a surge of wildfires, particularly in Suffolk.
Habitats are being destroyed as a result, and there are fears of irreversible ecological collapse, according to Natural England.
The water policy manager at Wildlife Trusts, Ali Morse, told the Guardian: “This week we’ve seen drought declared across half of England, but even under normal conditions, water scarcity is emerging as an urgent issue.
“If we don’t secure new water supplies and become more efficient with our use, it’s clear that, under a changing climate, we won’t have enough water to meet the needs of both society and the environment in future … but what most don’t realise is that across large parts of the country, we’re already reaching this limit.”

BROOK MITCHELL via AFP via Getty Images
3. Energy Concerns
Electricity demand typically goes up during extreme heatwaves, as people turn to air conditioning and fans, while their fridges go into overdrive to stay cool, putting further pressure on the system.
The very equipment controlling the grid might also struggle as power lines and insulators expand in high temperatures.
Overhead lines and underground cables can droop in hot weather too, bringing them close to surrounding environments with trees, buildings and the ground.
National Grid warned this week that “power cuts may be more common than usual”, as hot weather slows down the network.
The system told the Mirror: “Sustained heat like this puts extra pressure on our network. Equipment doesn’t get the chance to cool down overnight, and demand for cooling during the day adds to the strain.
“Longer heatwaves increase the risk of heat-related faults, which can cause power cuts for our customers.”
National Grid also advised Brits to keep a torch nearby with a spare set of batteries in case of unexpected power cuts.
4. Transport Strains
London bus drivers plan to strike later this month over working conditions with cab temperatures reaching almost 40C lately.
Soil shrinkage has disrupted rail services as well, while heat can warp rails, forcing operators to lower speed limits for safety.
The International Transport Forum warned that heatwaves are putting passengers at risk across Europe.
It said: “High temperatures can buckle railway tracks, strain power and cooling systems, and make buses, trains and stations unsafe or uncomfortable.
“Heat also increases the risk of heat exhaustion and heat stroke among transport workers, with implications for operational safety.”
The intergovernmental organisation called for vehicles to be modernised with effective cooling systems and more reflective materials to be used to reduce heat absorption, too.
5. Homes And Workspaces
UK buildings are built to retain warmth with thick walls and small windows but that means during heatwaves, it can feel impossible to cool down.
Most properties do not have air conditioning installed, either.
Not only are current homes and offices struggling to cope with the extreme weather, there’s a consequence for new homes, too.
Many of the areas in England where the government was hoping to build more homes are now facing major water shortages.
That means ministers may struggle to achieve their promise to build 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament.
Secretary general of the TUC Paul Nowak told the Guardian: “As heatwaves become our new normal, we need to find ways to work and live with hot weather.
“That means new laws on maximum working temperatures, adapting buildings and workplaces to keep them cool, and ambitious climate action to tackle the problem at its root.”
Labour said last month it was considering making it illegal to work when it is “too hot”.
6. Health Fears
England is heading for its highest number of heat-related deaths this summer with an estimated 2,877 people who died in the May and June heatwaves.
The UK’s Health Security Agency (UKHSA) released heat health alerts for eight regions of England this week, amid particular concern for the elderly.
UKHSA’s Polly Ashmore said: “We are urging health and social care services in affected regions to ensure they are prepared, and reminding people to look out for elderly relatives, neighbours and those with underlying health conditions, making sure they are aware of the forecast and following the necessary advice.
“Simple steps such as staying hydrated, avoiding the sun during the hottest part of the day and keeping your home cool are some of the key ways to help keep yourself and others safe during periods of hot weather.”
The NHS has also been urged to adapt to the rising temperatures.
Health secretary Yvette Cooper said this week that A&E pressures during summer will end up being as intense as those during the winter flu season.
The Royal College of GPs also advised doctors to cancel surgeries in extreme weather.
Radiotherapy machines and NRI scanners have failed in the heat too.
Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.
Politics
The culture war comes for Nolan’s The Odyssey
The furore surrounding the film the Odyssey exposes, again, how right-wing media discourse, tinged with overt racism, can be weaponised to fuel culture wars. Furthermore, it is used to score political points.
Amid the cacophony of praise surrounding Christopher Nolan’s Hollywood retelling of the Homer epic, it’s easy to forget that the controversy erupted long before its release. Not long after casting was made public, Nolan’s film was drawn into a wider right-wing cultural war battleground. The official trailer received the highest number of dislikes of any Nolan release. Even Elon Musk jumped on the bandwagon, bringing his familiar inflammatory culture-war commentary to the ‘discussion’ (because at this point and we expect nothing less).
The media pile-on
Before audiences had even seen the film, Nolan’s the Odyssey had been subject to a media pile-on.
Content farms and multimillion-dollar news networks churned out derogatory coverage. They confidently predicted the film would flop, however, inconveniently for them, the Odyssey has since become Nolan’s highest-grossing film.
This was predictably met with denial from some of the same pundits who helped manufacture the very outrage. Their rage-bait content exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of film history. In addition, it reveals a lack of knowledge about the Odyssey and Greek mythology. In other words, this is culture-war bluster masquerading as meaningful engagement. Much of the shallow discourse rests on the view of the Odyssey as a sacred text. They suggest it can be corrupted through reinterpretation.
This view refuses to acknowledge that Nolan’s Odyssey itself is a retelling. Yet it’s this belief that, ‘reinterpretation represents erasure’, which has driven much of the outrage so far. The expectation that adaptations must remain “untouched” fundamentally misunderstands the Odyssey’s legacy.
The Critical Drinker subreddit is having a meltdown over THE ODYSSEY having an 8.4 on IMDb.
If Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb are invalid, what’s next? Letterboxd? — Duhlorean (@Duhlorean98) July 19, 2026


pic.twitter.com/8qoSQbve5r
Or. The reality is we live in this time, and not in Ancient Greece, and Homer himself wrote his story 400 to 500 years after the Trojan War. Homer’s work isn’t a documentary. He didn’t know Agamemnon, he didn’t know a single person in his story. He wrote it thematic to…
— JR — (@JRGhaddar) August 2, 2026
The right-wing race card
The backlash also revealed clear racism overtones. Lupita Nyong’o’s casting as Helen of Troy, a mythical character from Ancient Greek literature, was met with vitriolic backlash.
Critics disguised their racist objections behind claims that the actress wasn’t “attractive enough.” Meanwhile, others nakedly expressed their racist “offence” at the decision to cast a Black woman.
Helen of Troy actress Lupita Nyong'o promotes ‘The Odyssey’ with bizarre Instagram dance video.
In Greek mythology, Helen of Troy is described as ‘the most beautiful woman in the world’ and ‘the face that launched a thousand ships.’ pic.twitter.com/QsnyM1XDl1 — Oli London (@OliLondonTV) July 25, 2026
The casting of trans actor Elliot Page was another target of the backlash. Rampant misinformation falsely claimed he had been cast as Achilles at the time. In reality, he was actually cast as Sinon, a Greek soldier.
Others took aim at Travis Scott’s casting, while critics argued — often without basis — that Nolan’s inclusion of minority actors erased Greek culture and betrayed the “original text”.
As discussed earlier, the Odyssey has been shaped by generations of storytellers before being attributed to the enigmatic Homer. As such, the story cannot be understood as the work of a single author.
‘Defenders of representation’ get it wrong
Although the film’s casting decisions have been rightly defended against racist backlash, the wider conversation exposed another limitation of shallow media discourse.
As the Canary has previously reported, during the pre-release period, revelations emerged that several scenes had been filmed in occupied Western Sahara without the input or permission of the Sahrawi people. Despite Sahrawi communities expressing their hurt, condemning the theft of their land, and calling for a boycott, their concerns were drowned out. The far louder debate surrounding ‘casting’ continues to dominate the conversation.
Parts of "The Odyssey" were filmed in occupied Western Sahara, defying requests from the Sahawari people.
Advocates are now calling for a boycott of the film and what they say is its complicity with Morocco's occupation and cultural genocide. pic.twitter.com/DEGSItsdS8
— Democracy Now! (@democracynow) July 17, 2026
Notwithstanding progressive commentators positioning themselves as ‘defenders of representation’ against the right-wing, much of the attention remained trapped in a manufactured debate, leaving little space for the marginalised communities actually affected by Hollywood’s practices. Ultimately, profit over people remains the order of the day.
This demonstrates not only the limits of progressive Hollywood discourse, but how media attention is often directed towards shallow culture-war debates instead of meaningful political conversation.
Therefore, Christopher Nolan’s the Odyssey reveals the wider harm of these controversies — a media ecosystem that rewards profitable outrage. Rather than amplifying culture-war outrage, any counter-discourse must examine Hollywood’s deeper harms, its colonial history, and the voices it continues to overlook.
Featured image via the Odyssey movie / Instagram
Politics
The explosion in kids with special educational needs is destroying our schools
The Times reported last month that Liverpool Walton now has the highest proportion of pupils identified as having special educational needs in England, with 32 per cent of children recorded as requiring additional support. This includes both pupils with formal education, health and care plans (EHCPs) and those identified by schools as needing extra provision. This striking development forms just part of the backdrop to Dave Clements’ timely and thought-provoking new book, The Crisis in the Classroom: How the Special Needs Explosion is Destroying Education.
The debate over the rapidly growing special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision has become increasingly polarised. On one side are those who attribute the sharp rise in conditions requiring special educational support, such as autism and ADHD, to improved awareness and better understanding of neurodevelopmental conditions. On the other are those who dismiss the trend as evidence of parental opportunism and / or system abuse. Clements’ book is valuable because it rejects both of these simplistic positions.
Clements acknowledges that diagnoses of conditions classified as a special educational need have risen dramatically and that schools are struggling to cope. But he also highlights a system of support that is slow, bureaucratic and poorly designed, leaving families to navigate complex assessments and appeals in search of support that is often delayed or inadequate. As a father of an autistic child, Clements brings his own experience to bear on this complex problem. As he observes, children too often receive labels without receiving meaningful help, and the support eventually offered frequently bears little relation to their actual needs.
Importantly, Clements rejects the idea that parents are manipulating the system. Most are simply trying to understand their child’s difficulties and secure appropriate assistance. The deeper problem, he suggests, lies in a system that confuses diagnosis with intervention.
The more difficult question the book raises is why diagnoses have increased so sharply in such a short period. Neurology or psychiatry cannot explain the scale of change. Cultural factors must also be considered. Clements cautiously explores whether shifts in how childhood is understood have played a role, with behaviours once seen as part of normal variation now increasingly interpreted through a medical lens. Educational struggles are seen as symptoms, and difference as a sign of a disorder.
This does not mean the conditions are invented. Rather, it suggests a growing tendency to medicalise aspects of childhood that were previously understood as part of its natural diversity. Alongside this, diagnostic labels have taken on a broader social function, offering a sense of identity, an explanation for one’s struggles and a feeling of community. In some cases, as Clements notes, a SEND label becomes ‘a badge of pride’.
A further cultural shift lies in the educational establishment’s growing discomfort with academic excellence. Over the past two decades, schools have increasingly absorbed the assumptions of therapeutic culture, in which academic difficulty is framed less as a challenge to be overcome and more as a potential threat to wellbeing.
One telling example is the abolition of the Gifted and Talented register in 2011. Once intended to identify and stretch high-achieving pupils, it fell out of favour as concerns about elitism grew. At the same time, the identification of additional needs expanded rapidly. Educational priorities shifted from cultivating excellence to managing vulnerability.
As a result, SEND has become more than a framework for supporting a minority of pupils with significant needs. It has become an organising principle for schools themselves. Ofsted, England’s school inspectorate, expects schools to have systems in place for identifying and tracking SEND provision. While well-intentioned, this emphasis can encourage schools to prioritise documentation and categorisation of pupils’ special educational needs over imparting subject knowledge, no matter how difficult.
Moreover, SEND provision often falls short of its promise. Support is frequently reduced to superficial adjustments, such as providing laptops, which may do little to address underlying difficulties and can sometimes introduce new distractions. More fundamental needs – such as developing organisational skills, managing cognitive load, or building independent learning habits – are often less effectively addressed.
This reflects one of Clements’ key arguments: the problem is not excessive support, but poorly designed support shaped by bureaucracy rather than educational judgement. Compliance too often replaces meaningful intervention.
The consequences extend beyond those formally identified as having special education needs. When teachers are required to tailor every lesson according to individual pupils’ requirements, and individualise every target and evidence every adjustment, the nature of teaching itself changes. Teachers become administrators of SEND provision rather than subject specialists. They concern themselves less with what pupils should learn than with ensuring their every special need and requirement is accommodated.
The result is a gradual lowering of expectations across the system. Clements argues that greater investment in specialist provision may be more effective than expecting mainstream schools to meet an ever-widening range of needs. In practice, universal academic expectations are increasingly replaced by personalised entitlement.
The broader implication is that the rise in SEND reflects not only administrative pressures but also a deeper shift in how policymakers and educators conceive of the purpose of education. Schools are increasingly encouraged to define pupils in terms of their vulnerability rather than their potential. While this approach is motivated by care, it risks reshaping education in ways that are ultimately limiting.
None of this is an argument against supporting children with genuine disabilities. On the contrary, the concern is that the expansion of the SEND regime risks diluting the support available to those who need it most. When too many difficulties are classified as special educational needs, it becomes harder to identify and respond effectively to severe cases.
The Crisis in the Classroom is a timely and important intervention. At a moment when questioning the rise in diagnoses is often seen as controversial, Clements manages to combine empathy for families with a willingness to examine the cultural and institutional forces shaping the system. If there is a crisis in the classroom, it’s about not only resources or diagnosis, but also how education understands children, learning and potential.
Neil Davenport is a writer based in London.
The Crisis in the Classroom: How the Special Educational Needs Explosion is Destroying Education, by Dave Clements, is published by Luath Press.
Politics
Why the woke left loves dancing on people’s graves
There’s nothing the digital left loves more than an untimely death. And if it’s a violent one, even better. Charlie Kirk’s body was barely cold before his haters were chortling: ‘Bye, Nazi bitch.’ ‘Good riddance’, tweeted batshit hack Ana Kasparian following the death of US Senator Lindsey Graham. Even the revelation that Tory grand dame turned Reform UK spokeswoman, Ann Widdecombe, had been beaten to death with a hammer was insufficient to stem the glee of the death-laughers. ‘Racist old bitch’, said the madder ones. ‘Bigot’, said the more ‘moderate’ ones.
And now the ghouls are coming for Rod Liddle, the brilliant, contrary columnist who died on Sunday at just 66 years of age. Even before his grave is dug, they’re dancing on it. He was a nonce-defender, a racist and a raging ‘Islamophobe’, wail the humourless tossers of the prick left. That none of this is true, and that defaming the freshly dead is about as scuzzy as human behaviour can get, matters not one jot to the Liddle vultures. They’ve got virtue to display, and if they must do it from the soapbox of a beloved writer’s corpse, so be it.
It really has been gross. It’s been particularly bad over on Bluesky. That’s the social-media sewer to which liberals and leftists decamped en masse after X finally permitted women to say ‘he’ about cocks in frocks and the ‘gammon’ masses to say ‘I don’t like mass immigration’. As Joanna Williams reports, Bluesky’s riff-raff-dodging wankers have been posting laughing emojis and images of champagne corks popping. Imagine the depthless narcissism it must require to celebrate a man’s death because he said things you disagree with. ‘Nothing human is alien to me’ and all that, but I do struggle to fathom such industrial-scale self-regard that cheers the sudden passing of a much-loved husband and father because it means you and your piss-weak constitution will be spared his hurty words.
Liddle hate swiftly became the bloodsport of the bourgeois left. It descended into a dark arms race of digital cruelty, each lowlife trying to outdo the other. Don’t forget his ‘galloping racism’ and his ‘repeated defences of paedophilia’, said one author. He ‘relentlessly promoted racism’, said some yapping leftist. He was a ‘bloviating bully’, said a blogger. He wasn’t. If the fainthearts of the coddled middle classes felt bullied by his columns, that’s on them. What’s more, at least he ‘bullied’ people who were alive, and could defend themselves, unlike his own shame-free posthumous persecutors.
Mehdi Hasan joined in. Of course he did. That muppet’s never seen a digital mob he didn’t want to join. ‘The outpouring of love for Rod Liddle’s offensiveness’ is a ‘reminder of how mainstreamed and even encouraged Islamophobia is in UK political and media discourse’, he said. Jesus, the ethno-narcissism. Liddle wasn’t a fan of Islam – get over it. Not everyone has to like your religion. Hasan’s Zeteo published a piece titled: ‘Rod Liddle has died. Here he is in his own words.’ Every quote was cynically yanked out of context in a bid to depict Liddle as a horrible bloke. It was tantamount to misinformation.
It’s the humourlessness of Liddle’s frenzied critics that is most striking. These prissy midwits wouldn’t know a joke if it slapped them in the face. (Calm down, lads, that’s not an incitement to violence – it’s just a saying.) Consider the claim that Liddle was a defender of paedophilia. This stems from a self-mocking column in which he said he could never have been a teacher because he’d have been too tempted to shag the pupils. They never quote from the rest of the column, in which he clearly states that teachers having sexual relationships with pupils is ‘wrong’, ‘imbecilic’ and ‘exploitative’. Why leave that out, liars?
Then there’s the line that gets quoted all the time. It’s from the Spectator. ‘My own view is that there is not nearly enough Islamophobia within the Tory Party’, he wrote. Bigot! Racist! Oh keep your knickers on. He makes it crystal clear in that piece that he’s using the term ‘Islamophobia’ to mean criticism of Islam. People should be permitted, he said, to call Islam an ‘oppressive ideology’ that sometimes grates against the ideals of ‘secular democracy and equal rights’.
The arrogance of people who make up a bullshit term like ‘Islamophobia’ to police and crush criticism of Islam and then clutch their pearls when a writer uses ‘Islamophobia’ to mean criticism of Islam. As Liddle said, having ‘misgivings’ about an ideology is ‘not racism’. Yep. He also said in that column that Boris Johnson was wrong to say women in burqas look like postboxes, because ‘postboxes are bright red’. ‘They look more like Darth Vader.’ Oh shit, a joke. Ready the fainting couch. Call the police.
I know, to explain a joke is to kill it. But what else are we to do in the face of such inane scoldery? All this Liddle hate is proof that university now makes you dumb. A whole new generation has been trained to cherish their self-esteem above all else, including the hard-won right of others to speak freely and blasphemously. The self-idolatry of the credentialled classes has birthed a public realm that is violently allergic to humour. Liddle was a devil to these god-children who prize their own feelings more highly than freedom.
Wokeness has become a death cult. Hundreds of public-sector workers in the US were reprimanded for celebrating the murder of Charlie Kirk. Social-media posts ‘rejoiced’ over the death of Lindsey Graham. Even national-treasure status could not protect Ann Widdecombe from the macabre elation of leftish whackjobs. I hope her death was ‘extremely painful’, said one academic. Add this grave-dancing to the fact that trans activists frequently wish death on ‘TERFs’, and that the keffiyeh classes are horrifically chill about the rape and murder of Jews, and it becomes undeniable: the crazier sections of the left see death as a righteous comeuppance for ‘right-wingers’.
To my mind, this death-chuckling is a cancerous outgrowth of cancel culture itself. An activist class that considers brutish cancellation to be a just punishment for wrongthink will soon look upon that most brutish cancellation of all – death – as something just or funny or at least as an opportunity to remind everyone about the dead person’s horribleness. The shameless glee with which the ‘progressive’ mob speaks ill of the dead is a testament to the savagery of neo-censorship. Convinced they should have the right to glide through life without ever hearing a sore word about their BS trans identity or their daft Islamic beliefs, they come to feel almost relief when a ‘hater’ snuffs it. The cult of narcissism is the midwife to truly cruel ways of thinking.
Brendan O’Neill is spiked’s chief political writer and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. His latest book – After the Pogrom: 7 October, Israel and the Crisis of Civilisation – is available to order on Amazon UK and Amazon US now. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy.
Politics
“Profound and at times exasperating”: Lord Rowlands reviews ‘Departure(s)’

May 2026: Julian Barnes in Barcelona | Image: David Zorrakino / Associated Press / Alamy
6 min read
His exceptional writing is always challenging – but is Julian Barnes’ last work a novel or a memoir? Who now cares? I don’t
In 1984 to my surprise I was invited to be a judge of the Booker Prize for Fiction, to be among a distinguished group of literati chaired by Professor Richard Cobb whose groundbreaking study of the French Revolution I had avidly read as a history undergraduate. Miraculously, we had agreed on a shortlist out of more than 120 entries.
Among them there was someone whom I had never read: Julian Barnes and his Flaubert’s Parrot, sometimes a bemusing but mesmerising read. It, in my mind, stood out as the exceptional entry only to find I was in a minority of one, the rest deeming that it wasn’t really a novel more a biography. I, also, found myself in a minority in my fallback choice JG Ballard’s Empire of the Sun, the panel preferring what I thought was the least inspiring, Anita Brookner’s Hotel du Lac.
But I became a Barnes devotee devouring his subsequent shortlisted novels – England, England, Arthur & George – until he finally won the prize with The Sense of an Ending. Fast forward: 2026. I eagerly purchase his latest, Departure(s), to find his declaration that this was to be his last.
One is driven to reach for a medical dictionary to try to understand
Rather hauntingly, I find that this last novel raises the same query as Flaubert’s Parrot: is it a novel? Frankly, it reads like a memoir and there’s almost an admission to that in the ‘blurb’: “Departure (s) is a work of fiction but that doesn’t mean it’s not true.” However, who now cares? I don’t. It’s a book of five parts (Barnes doesn’t call them chapters).
The first is enigmatically called, “The Great I AM” – certainly not a reference to the Christian God but an acronym of ‘Involuntary Autobiographical Memory’. There follows what seems to be his ultimate challenge – to a lay reader like me – to comprehend his detailed discourse of neurological concepts of memory and mind. One is driven to reach for a medical dictionary to try to understand. (We are confronted with a mind-boggling thought. While we imagine that we tell our brains in which direction to go, our brains have more on us than we have on them. They know all that we know, whereas we only know some of what they do. We sleep but the brain doesn’t. At this point I gave up…)
At least part two, “The Beginning Of The Story”, and part four, “The End of the Story”, are an easier read – an account of a particularly special relationship with two friends, Stephen and Jean, who had met first as college students. Decades later there is a grand reunion partly engineered by Barnes himself and which leads to their marriage, at which Barnes is best man at their church wedding.
Sadly he subsequently becomes a confidant to both as they describe a deteriorating relationship and, ultimately, a breakdown of the marriage. As he explains Stephen’s tragedy is that “he can love but his love cannot be accepted” and “her tragedy is that she cannot love, but that what she does offer is accepted as love”.
What he has done is provoke me to think
Here Barnes is seeking to explore the nature of love, claiming that the great novelists understand love and most aspects of human behaviour better than the psychiatrists, scientists, philosophers, priests or lonely-heart columnists. As he reminds us, he has written about love many times in his novels and few of his characters have been granted a happy ending.
The chapter in between (part three, “Manageable”) will resonate with so many readers for Barnes chooses to describe in considerable detail his own personal experience of being diagnosed with a rare kind of blood cancer. He is told bluntly that isn’t curable but, with various drugs, should be “manageable”. It prompts reflections upon the prospect of dying, claiming that he had “a lifelong engagement with death, both theoretical and actual and have written about it many times”. But he “hadn’t received a death sentence… instead a life sentence: sentenced to live with my cancer until I died”.
The final part, “Going Nowhere”, is the author’s valedictory message to his readers of more than a generation. The title immediately acknowledges his atheism. He doesn’t belief in an afterlife. He identifies himself as a supporter of the charity Dignity in Dying, “The Church and the Law have enforced indignity for far too long.”
Barnes, then explains the significance of his book’s title Departure(s). He, inevitably, reflects on those who have been close to him, the tragic death of his wife and other friends and – perhaps intriguingly – the news of the imminent death of a long-standing friend, Martin Amis in 2023, though there is deafening silence about the violent rupture of that friendship when Amis had left their mutual agent, Barnes’ wife Pat Kavanagh.
Central to his conclusion are observations on the characteristics of ageing and how to approach the prospect of dying. Hopefully, he writes, “the head and heart are still working as the body declines”. He identifies a familiar set of symptoms which most fellow octogenarians like myself certainly share – an increasing fickle memory, and a much slower recognition of people you know and have met. But, more absorbingly, how does one address the thought of dying?
Barnes recalls an interview when he was asked that – as he was now 76 and would never win the Nobel prize – was he raging against the dying of the light? (Though not acknowledged, it is of course a refrain from one of Dylan Thomas’ most famous poems.) He admits that he did rage against his wife’s traumatic death, the dying of her light, but on further reflection he accepted that it was just the universe doing its stuff.
Barnes’ final paragraph is a personal address to his readers (like me) of over more than 40 years. He tells us that he has no “grand pronouncements, no famous last words”, though he is unable to resist telling us he had one good example: Lord Grimsthorpe’s urgent, dying message to his wife, “We are low on marmalade.”
Barnes justifiably claims that he has never been a didactic writer telling us what to think or how to live. in my case certainly not – but what he has done is provoke me to think. At times it has been an exasperating read, sometimes unnecessarily complicated and an over indulgence in literary references. Yet he has made me to think of the fundamentals in his writings: the nature of life, love, memory, mortality.
Lord Rowlands is a Labour peer
Departure(s)
By: Julian Barnes
Publisher: Jonathan Cape
Politics
Why Do Fans Think Phoebe Bridgers Shaded Gracie Abrams On Her New Album?
Phoebe Bridgers appears to have taken a swipe at Gracie Abrams in a song from her upcoming album, Lost Weekend.
The two musicians were previously friends, with Gracie even serving as the opening act on Phoebe’s Reunion Tour in 2021, and later citing the Kyoto singer as one of her musical inspirations.
However, it seems their relationship has soured since Gracie started dating Phoebe’s ex, Paul Mescal, if lyrics from her upcoming third studio album are anything to go by.
Ahead of Lost Weekend’s release on Friday 14 August, a review from The Guardian teased lyrics from one song, titled The Governor’s Waltz, that both the newspaper’s critic and fans think are about Gracie.
On the new track, Phoebe is heard singing: “She can pretend to be me. Since she took my place in my bed, on that stage.”
In its review, The Guardian suggested this lyric “could be interpreted as a swipe at Mescal’s current partner, Gracie Abrams”.
This led to a frenzy on social media with people theorising about what the lyrics really mean, and what might have gone on between the two singers.
Phoebe and Paul dated for around two years before their break-up in 2022, with Gracie starting to date the Normal People actor two years later.
Since then, the new couple have made numerous red carpet appearances together, with the Aftersun actor even contributing a song to Gracie’s new record.
Phoebe’s bed-related lyric on The Governor’s Waltz may also relate to a certain set of space-themed sheets.
Users of the gossip-centric Fauxmoi subreddit have noted that Gracie used a bedroom set prop in a recent live performance, featuring a bedframe and sheets that closely resemble those of Phoebe’s childhood bedroom.
Elsewhere on her new album, Phoebe also appears to reveal that she and Paul were set to marry before their relationship ended, with The Guardian writing that “the title track confirms that they were, as rumoured, engaged (‘I’m supposed to be married but I called it off’)”.
Phoebe’s supposed dig could also be a retaliation to songs on Gracie’s 2024 album The Secret Of Us, which some fans interpreted to have been inspired by her new boyfriend’s previous relationship.
Since the speculation began with the publication of The Guardian’s review on Wednesday, none of the parties involved have commented publicly.
Politics
How To Talk To Kids If They Bring Up The Perez Hilton Livestream Video
This article discusses self-harm.
Earlier this week, it was reported that celebrity blogger Perez Hilton was receiving emergency medical care following a livestream in which he appeared to self-harm.
Police were dispatched to the internet personality’s home in Florida on Tuesday night, after concerning footage was circulated on social media, according to reports. He was then taken to a nearby hospital where he received medical attention and care from mental health professionals.
His family have since shared a statement saying Perez – who has three children aged 13, 11 and eight – is “able to communicate”. They asked for “continued prayers, understanding, and grace” as he continues to recover.
While TikTok confirmed it had removed the livestream, the Guardian reported that footage has also been “widely circulated across other platforms”. As a result, there’s a chance kids and teens might come across it – or actively seek it out.
Dr Catherine Knibbs, a therapist and online harms expert, shared that she’d been messaged a number of times about the Perez Hilton livestream.
She said in a social media video that she wanted to give parents a “heads up” as “your children might have seen, might still see, or might know about” what happened with the online personality.
“Some of your children will be, kind of just, they’ll pass it by; other children might be distressed, confused, want to understand it – and this is where, as a parent, we need to have open conversations,” said Dr Knibbs.
So, how is best to talk to young people about this?
If your child mentions the video, or what happened to Perez Hilton, experts agree that the best thing parents can do in this instance is keep the conversation going, and not shut it down.
“When children don’t understand what they’ve seen and we shut the door on communication, they tend to fill in the gaps themselves,” said Fiona Yassin, family psychotherapist, and founder and clinical director of The Wave Clinic.
“This has the potential to increase fear, confusion or distress about what they’ve seen, plus it might exacerbate anxiety and lead them to withdraw.”
But where do you even begin when talking about something that a) you might not have seen yourself or know much about, and b) is clearly a very complicated, emotive and sensitive situation?
Yassin suggested for parents to start by asking their child exactly what they’d seen or heard, and how it made them feel.
“Listen without judgement, acknowledge that it may have been upsetting to them, and answer their questions honestly using simple, age-appropriate language,” she advised.
“Stick to the facts and avoid speculation, as children often take their cues from the adults around them. You don’t need to have all the answers, but you do want to be a calm, reliable and trusted source of information for your child.”
If your child seems unusually anxious, withdrawn, or preoccupied after seeing the video – or if the conversation raises concerns about their own wellbeing or that of a friend – Yassin said “it’s really important to see support from a trusted mental health professional”.
“Young people can be exposed to highly distressing content without warning, and some may not have the emotional maturity or support to process what they’ve seen,” she added.
Dr Knibbs suggested that it’s important to have conversations with our children about human behaviour and mental health, as “you could be walking around a public environment such as a town centre and come across somebody ‘crashing out’ [slang for becoming suddenly, uncontrollably angry or distressed]”.
“We need to have conversations about human behaviour – and human behaviour is complicated,” she said in a video, before adding: “Your children need to know they can come and talk to you about this stuff.”
While talking about self-harm as a topic can feel scary and overwhelming for parents, Yassin said avoiding it “can leave young people feeling more isolated”.
“If we reflect on why we might be avoiding a conversation about something distressing, it’s usually because of our own discomfort, not our child’s. Instead, try to lean into the conversation in a considered, compassionate and open way,” she advised.
“When someone in the public eye shares something distressing, it can have a particularly powerful impact on young people because they’re naturally influenced by people they admire or follow in online spaces.
“Exposure to self-harm online involving a public figure can unintentionally make the behaviour seem more familiar and normal than it is.”
The therapist recommended steering clear of criticising the person involved or sensationalising what’s happened.
“This is an opportunity to help our child make sense of what they’ve seen in an age-appropriate way – a sign that someone is experiencing significant emotional distress and needs support,” she said.
“This helps separate the person from the behaviour, reducing the risk of young people seeing self-harm as something to copy or as an effective way of managing difficult emotions.”
My child has disclosed that they or a friend are self-harming, what should I do?
If the conversation gives your child the courage to open up about their own personal struggle with self-harm, or that of a friend, the most important response is to “stay calm, listen without judgement, and thank them for trusting you”, said the therapist.
Dr Josephine Neale, consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist at Priory, said parents should see self-harm as a “signal” of underlying emotional distress, “rather than simply a behaviour that needs to be stopped”.
“Let them know you take their concerns seriously, and create a safe space for ongoing conversations rather than treating it as a one-off discussion,” she advised.
If they are worried about a friend doing it, the psychiatrist suggested encouraging them not to carry that responsibility on their own and to involve a trusted adult.
It’s normal to feel overwhelmed, frightened or even guilty when a child shares they have been self-harming, but it’s important not to let these emotions get in the way of offering them support.
“If you need a moment to gather yourself, take it, then come back to the conversation with reassurance and openness,” said Yassin.
“Let your child know you’re there to support them, listen carefully to what they have to say, and acknowledge how difficult things must feel for them.
“Even if they insist they don’t need help, it’s important to seek professional support as soon as possible. Many young people feel self-harm is helping them cope, or worry that asking for help will make things worse, but while it may bring temporary relief, it doesn’t address the underlying distress.”
You can tell your child you are seeking support for them because you care about their safety and wellbeing. “Keeping them involved in the process helps build trust,” Yassin added. “With the right support, young people can learn healthier ways to manage overwhelming emotions and recover.
“Recovery isn’t always linear, and setbacks can happen, but it’s important for parents to remind young people of the progress they have made and reassure them that their recovery will continue.”
Any concerns about immediate safety, serious injury, or thoughts of wanting to end their life should be assessed by emergency or crisis services.
Help and support:
- Mind, open Monday to Friday, 9am-6pm on 0300 123 3393.
- Samaritans offers a listening service which is open 24 hours a day, on 116 123 (UK and ROI – this number is FREE to call and will not appear on your phone bill).
- CALM (the Campaign Against Living Miserably) offer a helpline open 5pm-midnight, 365 days a year, on 0800 58 58 58, and a webchat service.
- The Mix is a free support service for people under 25. Call 0808 808 4994 or email help@themix.org.uk
- Rethink Mental Illness offers practical help through its advice line which can be reached on 0808 801 0525 (Monday to Friday 10am-4pm). More info can be found on rethink.org.
Politics
From A Rose Toy To A Couples’ Sex Toy: This Lovehoney Sex Toy Box
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.
Every now and then, you get an inescapable sign from the universe. Order that takeout. Don’t message your ex.
This drop from Lovehoney is one of those signs. The iconic sexual wellness brand has teamed up with Cosmopolitan to create a box of sex toys to prioritise your pleasure. And, not to mention, at a banging discount – the box costs £99.99 for £216.91 worth of products.
In case you’ve somehow missed me waxing lyrical about orgasms, in short, this is where I stand: there’s nothing better, and vulva owners aren’t having them enough.
Sure, an orgasm doesn’t always have to be the goal, but it doesn’t hurt, either. If you’d like to have more, or at least get yourself on the road on the road to O town more often, this is the way to do it.
Stuffed with eight products, The O Box is curated to help you heighten your pleasure both with a partner and without.
Seriously – it comes with a We-Vibe Sync Lite, a C-shaped vibrator that can be worn to stimulate the clitoris (one of the most reliable routes to orgasm, FYI) during penetrative sex.
The insertable end is thin and discreet enough that a penis or dildo can fit inside you while you wear it, and I’m a huge fan of the fact it uses rumbly vibrations rather than buzzy ones, so your clit doesn’t feel like it’s about to take off.
It’s even app-controlled, so you can power up through its 10 intensity levels without having to break skin contact with your lover.
Then, for an option you can reach for either alone or coupled up, the box also has a coveted Rose sex toy.
ICYMI during the pandemic (like, what else were you doing?) this floral-shaped toy uses suction technology to simulate the best oral sex of your life, and is perfectly sized to fit in your hand so you can rub one out during doggy – or on your back if you prefer to be a solo queen.
If both of those (worth £135 on their own!) weren’t enough for you, Lovehoney has stocked the box full of everything you need for a blooming good time.
We’re talking a bullet vibrator, to keep things simple, water-based lube, a silk eye mask and silk wrist restraint, vanilla-scented massage oil, and even a set of 52 Cosmosutra sex position cards, to give you plenty of ideas to spice things up if you (against all odds) manage to get bored.
Of course, the entire box comes in a stunning red and pink colourway – perfect for an evening of wooing and romancing yourself (and a lover, if you’re feeling generous).
A sign to level up your pleasure? Consider it received.
Politics
Emmerdale’s Lawrence Robb Joins Strictly Come Dancing 2026 Cast
Soap fans can look forward to seeing another familiar face in the ballroom when Strictly Come Dancing returns to our screens later this year.
On Thursday morning, the BBC announced that actor Lawrence Robb was the 12th star who’s signed up for Strictly this year.
Lawrence is best known for his performance as Mackenzie “Mack” Boyd, one of the newer additions to Emmerdale’s iconic Dingle family, in the long-running ITV soap.
“I don’t know who’s more excited about this, me or my mother,” he joked when the news was confirmed, before admitting: “I can’t quite believe that I am going to be getting my dancing shoes on this September on one of my favourite shows of all time!”
He enthused: “It’s a dream come true, and I can’t wait to bring my all to ballroom. Wish me luck, and any advice is very welcome – trust me I’ll need it!”
Outside of the Dales, Lawrence is known for his work in the dark comedy I Hate Suzie, and the West End shows Legally Blonde and Mojo.
He joins a line-up that already includes EastEnders alum Lacey Turner and Jaime Winstone, alongside a host of stars from the world of music, sport, TV and beyond.

Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
The additional three stars on the line-up will be announced in due course, ahead of Strictly’s launch show in September, which will mark Emma Willis, Johannes Radebe and Josh Widdicombe’s debut as hosts.
Politics
Nadia Sawalha Takes ‘Legal Action’ Against ITV Over Loose Women Absence
Loose Women presenter Nadia Sawalha is claiming that she is taking legal action against her employers at ITV.
In recent history, Nadia had been at the centre of speculation about her status as a member of Loose Women’s on-air team, with reports in the tabloid press having previously suggested she had been temporarily “dropped” due to her vocal support of Palestine on social media.
Earlier this week, the former Celebrity Big Brother housemate vowed to share her side of the story as to why she hadn’t been on Loose Women for a period of time, having last appeared on the topical panel show back in April 2026.
“I will be telling the whole story. It’s pretty unbelievable,” she teased, ahead of a more candid post on Thursday morning.
Nadia began by telling her followers: “My legal team at ELSC have today written to ITV alleging that I have been treated unlawfully due to my protected beliefs. Now, before I say anything else, I want to say how sad I am that it’s got to this, believe me. I have appealed to ITV’s hearts and minds, but to no avail.”
She continued: “After I began speaking publicly in support of Palestine in December 2023, I became the target of an escalating campaign of smears, complaints, hostile media coverage and targeted calls to have me removed from Loose Women. Since then, ITV have taken me on and off Loose Women a number of times.
“I’ve mostly been told that the reason for this was – and I quote – ‘it’s all just a bit noisy out there for us’.”
Nadia then reminded her followers: “In July 2026, after I’d been taken off air again, and Mark [Adderley, her husband] was running as a Green [party] councillor, a number of newspapers made false allegations about us, accusing us of supporting terrorism and being anti-semitic. Disgusting.
“So far, two of the papers have had to issue apologies and pay damages, and other cases are still pending. Now, around the same time, an open letter from a group of prominent pro-Israel media figures apparently sent a 20-page document to ITV urging them not to reinstate me. No one has yet paid me the courtesy of allowing me to see the letter or answer the accusations.
“ITV have continued to take me on and off Loose Women, forever changing the goalposts, whilst also saying that they couldn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t take me off again as it would depend on what was said – even though I am hired for being an opinionated woman on a discussion show and I’d never brought up or spoken about Palestine directly on the show.”
“This is the tip of the iceberg of what’s been happening,” she alleged, before pointing out that “this is Instagram, and I only have three minutes”, and saying that in addition to her “taking legal action against ITV”, she also wanted her supporters to sign a petition in solidarity with her.
She added: “Two years ago, a petition to get me removed from Loose Women was set up, but now I want to show there are many more people with us than against us.
“I want to make it clear, it’s not just me that’s been targeted like this for my beliefs. There are the teachers, doctors, nurses, charity and supermarket workers and students who’ve also spoken according to their conscience, and have suffered a similar fate as me. Well, enough is enough.
“We need to send a clear message to ITV, and other groups and corporations, that we won’t be scared into silence. No one should be bullied out of their job for following their conscience and speaking out against brutal oppression.”
HuffPost UK has contacted ITV for comment.
Nadia made her Loose Women debut in 1999, parting ways with the show in 2002. She then returned to the panel in 2013, and has remained part of the line-up until recent history, which has seen her becoming featured more sparingly.
Last month, she and her husband Mark Adderly received apologies from the Daily Mail and Metro news outlets after reports in which the pair were “wrongfully accused” of “celebrating” the terrorist acts of Hamas, which they said was both “unforgiveable” and had put their family “in danger”.
In their correction notes, both outlets acknowledged that Mark had not shown “support for terrorism or hatred of Jews”.
“The article also said that Mr Adderley and his wife, Ms Sawalha, run a Youtube channel, and that Ms Sawalha fully supported her husband, which may have suggested that she endorsed the statements and videos wrongly said to have been shared by him,” they said. “These allegations were false and we apologise to Mr Adderley and Ms Sawalha for the error and distress caused.”
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Wit & Wisdom
-
Politics6 days agoMeta enters AI-training agreement with far-right ‘propaganda rag’ Newsmax
-
Politics4 days agoZack Polanski: an incitement to murder Nigel Farage?
-
Crypto World5 days agoMicroStrategy Post-Earnings CLARITY Act Push Could Add New Catalyst for Its Stock
-
Crypto World5 days agoXRP Ledger v3.3.0 brings five institutional features
-
Politics7 days agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
-
Crypto World6 days agoNew York sues Kalshi over prediction market gambling
-
Sports7 days agoSeema Kaliramna Wins Discus Throw Bronze, Takes India’s CWG Medals Tally To 17
-
Crypto World4 days agoCrypto PAC spending tops $2M in Michigan House race
-
Business3 days agoDTCR: Deleveraging And A Hedge Fund Collapse Point To A Possible AI Bottom
-
Business6 days agoTrump Announces Hamas Disarmament Agreement as Iran Strikes Kuwait Air Base and US Attacks Pause Overnight
-
Crypto World6 days ago3 Fed Officials Just Explained Their Rate Hike Vote: Is Inflation Winning?
-
Tech4 days agoESET tracks rise in malicious AI skills and adaptable malware
-
Tech6 days agoGemini Spark can now use Chrome logins and saved passwords to run errands on your behalf
-
Sports5 days agoFrance Cricket implodes: letters hidden in a drawer and a board at war
-
Crypto World4 days agoXRP Ledger urges node upgrade after manifest flood
-
Tech6 days agoBuilding A Reproduction PlayStation Motherboard
-
Crypto World5 days agoMoneyflip CEO charged in $40K murder-for-hire plot
-
Sports6 days agoBruno Fernandes decision made as Man United ‘discuss’ striker transfer option
-
News Videos5 days agoFinancial Crash Expert: The 90-Day Collapse Timeline They Are Desperately Hiding.


You must be logged in to post a comment Login