Politics
David Buck: On SEN, Phillipson has become the Secretary of State for re-fried bean counters
Dr David Buck C.Psychol AFBPsS is an Independent Consultant Educational Psychologist and a former SEN Ofsted Inspector.
Bridget Phillipson’s latest announcement on Special Educational Needs (SENs) is being billed as bold reform.
In reality, it is a weary rehash of old ideas dressed up as a “once in a generation opportunity”. The Education Secretary’s central claim is that spiraling demand for Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) must be curbed by reserving them for children with the most “complex” needs. Yet EHCPs are now the only robust legal protection for SEN provision beyond the discretion of schools and local authorities. To shrink access to them is not reform. It is retrenchment.
Her language of “over-demand” from parents and schools will be familiar to anyone who has followed this debate over the past four decades. So, too, will her rhetoric of “inclusion”.
Inclusion is not new
The push to integrate children with SEN into mainstream schools did not begin in 2026. It began in earnest with the Warnock Report 1978, which reshaped the language and philosophy of special needs provision. It drew upon American developments such as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, which mandated special education in the “least restrictive environment” signed off in 1975 it somewhat pre-dates Phillipson’s current enthusiasm for “inclusion”. All her proposals are presented as novel whilst successive British statutes have already embedded the principles: The Education Act 1981 introduced the concept of special educational needs and the Statementing process, with a preference for mainstream schooling wherever possible. The Education Act 1993 created SEN coordinators (SENCOs) and a Tribunal system. The Education Act 1996 consolidated earlier provisions. The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 strengthened the right to ‘mainstream’ education and extended disability discrimination law to schools. The Equality Act 2010 required “reasonable adjustments” for disabled pupils. Finally, the Children and Families Act 2014 replaced Statements of SEN (SSEN) with EHCPs and extended support to age 25, mandating cooperation between education, health and social care services.
“Inclusion” is therefore not an innovation. It is already deeply embedded in law. The suggestion that today’s difficulties stem from a failure to embrace it is implausible. The problem is not philosophy but funding.
More troubling still is the new emphasis on “complexity” as the gatekeeper for legal protection. Complexity is not a reliable proxy for severity or urgency. A profoundly deaf child, a pupil with severe ADHD, or one with acute language disorder may have only a single, clearly defined need — but an urgent one, nevertheless. To imply that only the multiply diagnosed merit enforceable provision is to redefine need downwards.
We have seen this type of manoeuvre many times before e.g. “Care in the community” once accompanied cuts to institutional provision. Now “inclusion” risks becoming the rhetorical cover for narrowing statutory entitlement for SENs.
Individual Support Plans: re-heated
Phillipson’s other flagship proposal — Individual Support Plans (ISPs) — is presented as fresh thinking. It is simply not so. Before 2014, similar staged interventions were standard practice as a prelude to statutory assessment and Statements of SEN.
The old three stage model worked roughly as follows. At classroom level, teachers ‘differentiated’ their course content for the substantial minority (20%) identified since Warnock as having learning difficulties. If progress lagged, an individual education plan (IEP) was written by the class teacher and delivered with teaching assistant support. If that proved insufficient, further IEPs incorporated input from external professionals. Only after these three stages — often spanning several terms — would a statutory assessment be triggered, potentially leading to a Statement and the legal protections that followed.
Parents frequently experienced this as delay. Teachers, burdened by time and training constraints, often preferred swift progression to a Statement that would bring ring-fenced funding. SENCOs had to ration scarce support hours across Stages 2&3. Headteachers balanced training costs against the financial implications of rising Statements for which they would expect additional budgetary support. Local authorities (LAs), for their part, funded earlier-stage interventions while exercising bureaucratic caution over expensive statutory assessments — yet also used rising Statement numbers to argue for larger budgets from central government.
In other words, every actor operated within differing financial incentives that shaped their behaviour. Rebranding these stages as ISPs will not change those incentives. Without serious investment in training and staffing — and without legal enforceability — ISPs will once again be seen, like IEPs, as hurdles to clear on the way to guaranteed provision.
The cycle repeats
In 2014, Statements were abolished and EHCPs introduced, partly in response to frustration about delay and bureaucracy. Now EHCPs are blamed rather than SSENs for generating delay and over-demand. But demand rises for a simple reason: they work! They are the only mechanisms that guarantee additional resources with a right of tribunal appeal, just like SSENs
If IEPs are revived as ISPs chiefly to reduce EHCP numbers, history will repeat itself. Schools and parents will still seek the only secure route to provision. The terminology will change; the incentives will not. Phillipson cannot be unaware of this. The profession understands it well. What is cynical is to present underfunded consultation plans as reform while quietly tightening access to the only legally enforceable safeguard.
Phillipson’s strategic use of “complexity” will not solve the problem either. If anything, it will intensify the medicalisation of educational need. When legal protection hinges on multi-layered diagnoses, categories with recognised “co-morbidities” will expand. Autistic Spectrum diagnoses, already associated with anxiety (40-55 per cent), depression (10-20 per cent), ADHD (30-70 per cent) and epilepsy (up to 45 per cent), will become more attractive gateways to protection. The cost implications will show a familiar asymmetry by falling primarily on education budgets, not health.
Meanwhile, the genuinely complex group — pre-school and early years children whose needs span multiple agencies — remains persistently under-resourced. ‘StartRight’ early intervention services and ‘Portage’ home-visiting provision have withered in practice. The families of this group lack the organised lobbying power of older cohorts, just as the elderly are easy to overlook, such groups lack a collective, cohesive voice and therefore become fair game for cuts.
A question of candour
If the objective here is genuinely to meet SENs, ministers must confront the funding gap openly. if the objective is to cut costs, they should say so. Dressing reductions in the language of innovation and inclusion insults the intelligence of both parents and professionals alike.
EHCPs may be imperfect. But they represent the culmination of decades of legislative development designed to protect vulnerable pupils from the vagaries of local budget constraints and management. To reserve them for only an ill-defined elite of those with “complex” needs is to hollow out that protection.
Demand for EHCPs will remain as strong as demand once was for Statements, because families will always seek the only mechanism that carries legal force. Shift the language from “deficit” to “complexity”, and the system will adapt accordingly.
There is nothing “once in a generation” about this cycle. It is the familiar parade of reform without resources. If ministers wish to break it, they must address causes rather than redefine categories — and fund inclusion rather than merely invoke its promise.
The emerging quagmire and resistance to the illegal US-Israeli war on Iran seem to have pushed the Donald Trump regime’s war propaganda into hyperdrive. But US citizens have seen this toxic story before. So cheap words and movie montages are unlikely to convince more people to back wasting billions on another forever war.
‘Embarrassing’ US war propaganda
The unprovoked US-Israeli offensive is already less popular than Vietnam. And just days in, there is open, widespread criticism of it in the US. This is hardly surprising, considering it has so far killed over 1,200 people in Iran and sparked regional chaos.
In this context, Trump’s White House has shared a vomit-worthy propaganda video. But far from helping, it has made his regime look even more like coked-up, roid-raging incels playing shoot-em-up games in their parents’ basements. And people were quick to point out its awfulness, with one calling it:
possibly the most embarrassing thing I’ve ever seen from any Government ever
lol interesting movie choices
Braveheart: The entire movie is about resisting imperial occupation by a more powerful nation. Using it to celebrate American military power is exactly backwards — we are the empire.
Saul Goodman: A corrupt, morally bankrupt lawyer who helps a…
— Adam Del (@adam__xyz) March 6, 2026
Wild that this is the reality: pic.twitter.com/z36Cylfi5n
— The Political Bitcoiner (@PoliticalBTC) March 6, 2026
The White House has also been putting out laughably fawning authoritarian phrases about “Unstoppable Momentum”, such as:
Under the decisive leadership of President Donald J. Trump, America’s unparalleled warfighters are delivering devastating strikes in Operation Epic Fury
And it seems to have taken tips from the propagandists of George Orwell’s 1984:
The only way. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/GQWt4LwsNH
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) March 5, 2026
The corporate media, meanwhile, has been playing along. It has:
Two nuclear powers — the US and Israel — are rampaging through Western Asia in violation of international law, disrupting energy supplies and destroying lives. And on top of that, Donald Trump’s regime is treating people in the US and around the world like idiots.
If the reaction online and offline is anything to go by, however, Trump’s war propaganda may be doing more harm to his reputation than good.
Featured image via the Canary
Politics
Former President Barack Obama speaks during final public tribute to the late Rev. Jesse Jackson
CHICAGO — Former President Barack Obama said the presidential runs in the 1980s by the late Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. set the stage for other Black leaders, including himself.
“The message he sent to a 22-year-old child of a single mother with a funny name, an outsider, was that maybe there wasn’t any place or any room where we didn’t belong,” Obama said Friday at a Chicago church as mourners paid a final public tribute for the civil rights legend.
“He paved the road for so many others to follow,” Obama said of Jackson.
Obama is joined by two other former Democratic presidents, Joe Biden and Bill Clinton, at a celebration of life for Jackson. Obama received the loudest round of applause as the three entered the chamber.
“We are living in a time when it can be hard to hope,” Obama said. “Each day we wake up to some new assault to our democratic institutions. Another setback to the idea of the rule of law, an offense to common decency. Every day you wake up to things you just didn’t think were possible.”
“Each day we are told by folks in high office to fear each other,” said Obama, referring to the current Republican leadership in Washington.
Former Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris is also listed as a speaker on the program, according to the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, the organization that Jackson founded.
President Donald Trump, who praised Jackson on social media after he died and also shared photos of the two of them together, was not attending the service, according to his public schedule issued by the White House.
Thousands attend Jackson memorial service
The event honors the protege of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and two-time presidential candidate and follows memorial services that drew large crowds in Chicago and South Carolina, where Jackson was born. Friday’s celebration — at an influential Black church with a 10,000-seat arena — is expected to be the largest.
Crowds of attendees waited in long lines outside the church on the city’s South Side as television screens played excerpts of some of Jackson’s most famous speeches. Inside, vendors sold pins with his 1984 presidential slogan and hoodies with his “I Am Somebody” mantra.
Along with a slew of Illinois elected leaders, notable attendees included actor and producer Tyler Perry, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and political activist and theologian Cornel West. NBA Hall of Famer and Chicago native Isiah Thomas was one of the speakers.
Marketing professional Chelsia Bryan said Friday that she decided to attend the memorial service because it was “a chance to be part of something historic.”
“As a Black woman, knowing that someone pretty much gave their life, dedicated their life to make sure I can do the things that I can do now, he’s worth honoring,” Bryan said.
Jackson Jr.: Everyone welcome
Jesse Jackson Jr. said all were welcome to celebrate his father’s life.
“Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, right wing, left wing because his life is broad enough to cover the full spectrum of what it means to be an American,” Jackson Jr. said last month. “Dad would have wanted us to have a great meeting to discuss our differences, to find ways of moving forward and moving together.”
The elder Jackson died last month at age 84 after battling a rare neurological disorder that affected his mobility and ability to speak. Family members say he continued coming into the office until last year and communicated through hand signals. His final public appearances included the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
Sitting in the crowd was 90-year-old Mary Lovett. She said Jackson’s advocacy inspired her many times, from when she moved from Mississippi to Chicago in the 1960s, taught elementary school and became a mom. She twice voted for Jackson during both of his presidential runs and appreciated how he always spoke up for underrepresented people. “He’s gone, but I hope his legacy lives,” she said. “I hope we can remember what he tried to teach us.”
Jackson’s service was to the poor, underrepresented
Jackson’s pursuits were countless, taking him to all corners of the globe: Advocating for the poor and underrepresented on issues including voting rights, health care, job opportunities and education. He scored diplomatic victories with world leaders, and through Rainbow PUSH Coalition, he channeled cries for Black pride and self-determination into corporate boardrooms, pressuring executives to make America a more open and equitable society.
His son, Yusef Jackson, who runs the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, recalled how his father carried a well-worn Bible but also showed his faith by showing up to picket lines.
“He lived a revolutionary Christian faith rooted in justice, nonviolence and the moral righteousness,” Yusef Jackson said Friday. “He was deeply involved in the political struggles of his time, but his gift was that he could rise above them. It’s not about the left wing or the right wing. It takes two wings to fly. For him, the goal was always the moral center.”
Jackson’s services in Chicago and South Carolina drew civic leaders, school groups and everyday people who said they were touched by Jackson’s work, from scholarship programs to advocating for inmates. Several states flew flags at half-staff in his honor.
Services in Washington, D.C., were tabled after a request to allow Jackson to lie in honor in the United States Capitol rotunda was denied by House Speaker Mike Johnson, who said the space is typically reserved for select officials, including former presidents. Details on a future event have not been made public.
!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”5870673b-4022-472c-b786-c6beba0e7cda”}).render(“69ab35f8e4b0bda876a961f6”);});
Morrisons has announced that all accessible toilets in its supermarkets, across England, Scotland and Wales are now stoma-friendly. The initiative aims to support independence, dignity and comfort for people living with a stoma.
The new facilities arrive following customer feedback. They represent a practical step towards strengthening access to appropriate facilities beyond the home.
Stoma-friendly facilities
Morrisons stoma-friendly toilets include features advised by Colostomy UK. These include:
- Hooks for clothing or bags.
- Shelf for supplies.
- Bin for discreet disposal.
- Mirror to help with appliance checks.
Morrisons worked with MSP and advocate for the stoma community Edward Mountain to introduce the new facilities. Mountain wrote to the retailer to share his story and request the toilets be stoma-friendly. He was diagnosed with bowel cancer in 2022 and had a stoma whilst his bowel recovered.
Currently around one in 335 people in the UK are living with a stoma. Individuals of all ages may have one, which can be temporary or for the rest of their life. Stoma surgery can take place to treat a range of illnesses including cancer, diverticulitis and Crohn’s disease or following a trauma to the abdomen.
Colostomy UK welcomed the commitment to stoma-friendly toilets in all stores. The charity raises awareness and champions for simple changes to ensure people with a stoma can live full, active lives without unnecessary barriers.
David Scott, corporate affairs director at Morrisons, said:
We’re really pleased to introduce these improvements in all our stores after listening to customers and with guidance from Colostomy UK.
We worked closely with Edward Mountain, who wrote to us about his personal condition and we found his letter incredibly moving. From this, we recognised that living with a stoma is often a hidden experience that still brings practical challenges in daily life.
By making facilities easier to use across all Morrisons stores, we hope this brings reassurance when out and about and represents a step towards reducing everyday barriers and improving access to suitable facilities across the country.
Conservative MSP Mountain commented:
As a bowel cancer survivor, and as someone who’s lived with the consequences of bowel surgery and a stoma, I cannot emphasise how important this is. These new facilities will make bathrooms easier to use, more accessible, and spell the end of the difficulties, embarrassment and discomfort many of us faced to this point.
I am immensely grateful to Morrisons, who engaged with me positively from the outset and have come good on their pledge. I hope other supermarkets and major public-facing businesses take heed of this excellent example.
Giovanni Cinque, marketing and campaigns manager at Colostomy UK said:
Our research shows that access to suitable toilets remains one of the biggest barriers to people living confidently with a stoma. Many tell us they carefully plan journeys, cut trips short, or only go out when absolutely necessary because they are unsure what facilities will be available.
Stoma friendly features such as a shelf, a bin for discreet disposal, hooks and a mirror may seem simple, but they make a real difference to comfort, dignity and peace of mind.
We welcome Morrisons’ commitment to introducing these changes in stores nationwide and thank them for listening to the stoma community and taking practical action to improve access.
The locations of all Morrisons stores and the availability of facilities will appear on Colostomy UK’s online listings of stoma-friendly toilet venues. This is a resource to make planning trips, outings, and daily activities easier by highlighting venues that offer practical, considerate facilities.
Featured image via Colostomy UK
Just weeks after the illegal kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, UK-based Shell has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Venezuelan government to begin liquified natural gas (LNG) production in the Dragon gas field.
The agreement, announced during US Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s visit to Caracas, places the British company in front of the race to exploit Venezuela’s resources.
Burgum told Fox News that companies like Shell are already “signing deals and moving this opportunity forward,” noting that they joined American firms including Baker Hughes, Halliburton, and KBR in responding to President Trump’s call to energy leaders in early January.
Burgum says US-Venezuela ties moving at ‘Trump speed,’ will help keep energy costs down for Americans https://t.co/EcZ3rtaZ7Y
— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) March 6, 2026
Fox reported that
Burgum was meeting with oil and gas executives, including Chevron and Shell, along with Venezuelan business leaders during his trip to highlight critical mineral partnerships.
Historical meddling
This is absolutely no surprise to anyone who has followed Shell’s history including its role in the genocide in Gaza.
According to Declassified UK, BP and Shell had been authorized to operate in Venezuela under new licences from the US Treasury in mid-February. Declassified said that “this comes after decades of UK interference in Venezuela’s oil and gas industry.”
🚨Following the illegal kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro, BP and Shell have been cleared to operate in Venezuela under newly issued licences from the US treasury department.
This comes after decades of UK interference in Venezuela’s oil and gas industry.
👉https://t.co/ItX1m4YdSm pic.twitter.com/ZGCWU48Joh— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) February 18, 2026
For instance, in 2001, Shell and BP lobbied Tony Blair to pressure Hugo Chávez into softening his Hydrocarbons Law, with the US noting BP stood to lose from the reforms, according to Declassified’s expose. It also detailed Shell’s covert funding of CIA-linked propaganda in the 1960s in Venezuela.
Imperial hubris
In the immediate aftermath of Maduro’s kidnapping Telegraph gave space to an editorial talking about this exact plunder that we are seeing now. 
The editorial read:
BP and Shell cannot afford to miss out on Venezuelan gold rush
The potential gains for Western oil companies will ultimately trump any ethical considerations
Marlow further reflects seemingly fondly on BP’s history in Iran saying:
Still, the global oil industry has been built on the exploits of buccaneers daring to venture into far-flung, dangerous corners of the world and do business under the most hazardous of circumstances.
BP’s roots can be traced back to the discovery of oil in the Persian desert at the turn of the 20th century by the British entrepreneur called William Knox D’Arcy.
When D’Arcy’s drills eventually struck oil, British imperial soldiers were summoned to surround the area and protect it from any local opportunists.
To describe the local population—the rightful inheritors and caretakers of their land’s resources – as ‘local opportunists’ shows that imperial hubris knows no bounds.
Meanwhile, BBC interviewed BP’s former chief executive, Lord Browne, who speculated that BP and Shell were already lobbying the government to secure a role in redeveloping Venezuela’s oil and gas assets.
The Israel link
According to Joseph Bouchard writing for Responsible Statecraft (RS), the overthrow of Maduro was strategically useful for US and British oil giants like BP and Shell and Israel.
The Chavismo ideology supports Palestinian liberation, aligning itself with other self-avowedly pro-Palestine US adversary states like Cuba.
In Israel’s calculus, the overthrow of Maduro was a blow to Iran, a safeguard for U.S. oil interests, and one more step in building out a pro-American, pro-Israel bloc in Latin America.
For Israeli hardliners, removing one of the last major anti-Zionist governments in the Americas weakened Iran’s regional influence, according to RS
With Israel cheering from the sidelines and US officials boasting of “Trump speed,” the plunder of Venezuela’s – ofcourse, UK couldn’t be out of the looting.
Featured image via the Canary
On 5 March, Trump ignominiously sacked Kristi Noem from her state-level role as Homeland Security secretary. Oklahoma senator Markwayne Mullin will take up her place at the end of the month, pending confirmation from the US Senate.
Readers will, by now, no doubt be familiar with Noem as the public face of America’s far-right anti-immigration policies. In particular, Noem called both Renee Good and Alex Pretti ‘domestic terrorists’ after their murder by ICE agents last year.
Although, let’s be clear here. Trump didn’t fire Noem because she’s a lying fascist at the head of a pack of murderers. That would be hypocritical. Rather, Trump knows that public opinion has turned against his immigration policies, and he needed a sacrificial lamb.
Fascism and fuckups
In place of her previous role, Trump is now shunting Noem off to a job as a ‘special envoy’ for the US. She’ll be joining a Western hemisphere security initiative called ‘the Shield of the Americas’.
Among the former Homeland Security chief’s laundry list of highly public fuckups, Noem accidentally let slip the identity of ICE murderer Jonathan David Ross. She also claimed that Ross had internal bleeding, which was later exposed as a lie.
Other examples of Noem’s outright fabrications include the utterly false claim that an immigrant deportee was a cannibal. She also published a photo of a Black protester that was manipulated to look like she was crying.
Noem’s tenure at Homeland Security saw her join ICE raids wearing a bulletproof vest, promote policies to close the Mexican border, and spend $220m of federal funds on adverts. Most of those adverts, she appeared in personally.
All horrifying, and all par for the course for the Trump regime. As such, she’s acted as something of a Nazi-slogan-spouting figurehead for the Republicans’ vicious ‘security’ policies.
Sacrificial wolf
On 3 March, Noem attempted to defend her spending at a Capitol Hill hearing. There, she stated that Trump was aware of the cost of the ad campaign. Two days later, Trump claimed that he “never knew anything about it”, shortly before firing her.
However, this was far from the first indicator that Noem had fallen from the US dictator’s favour. During the sweeping protests against ICE in Minneapolis, Trump sent in ‘border tsar’ and former ICE director Tom Homan, rather than Noem herself.
The fact that Trump has sacked Noem is no indicator of his authoritarianism softening. Rather, the US dictator has seen that his public approval is plummeting, particularly on the subject of immigration.
Turns out that using a masked secret police to murder and kidnap people to concentration camps makes you unpopular, even in America.
As such, Noem has made a convenient sacrifice to make Trump look like he’s relenting. Meanwhile, nothing will change under Markwayne Mullin, save maybe that ICE will get a little more cautious, a little more covert in their actions.
The problem was never that they’re fascists — the problem was they got caught too many times.
Featured image via the Canary
UK Deputy PM David Lammy was asked on Sky News for his assessment of the recent mass fatalities after a suspected US precision bomb hit a girls’ primary school in Iran. Asked if the targeted attack constitutes a breach of international law, Lammy attempted to deflect saying:
This is a febrile war zone.
Sky’s Kamali Melbourne pointed out that active war zones don’t justify hitting schools, which are protected sites under international law. Seemingly unaffected by the mass murder of young Iranian girls, Lammy suggests he’s waiting for the say-so of his overlord US President Trump:
Well, I don’t know the veracity of that statement, and I haven’t seen the intelligence, but it is absolutely for the Americans to comment on what has happened there.
Once again, UK officials choose to look away, refusing to condemn war crimes committed against brown, Muslim, and Arab people.
“You recognise.. if a school was targeted that would constitute a breach of intl law?”
“This is a febrile war zone”
“That doesn’t excuse hitting schools..”
“… its for the Americans to comment on what’s happened there”
So you’ve never commented on Russian war crimes, right? https://t.co/ZjLLDxNixu pic.twitter.com/vjsdCaWAxm
— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) March 6, 2026
Lammy needs to learn: no intelligence justifies murdering children
This deplorable interview with David Lammy cannot be ignored. Lammy appears unable or unwilling to show compassion and demand the US protect civilians in Iran in accordance with international law. Even worse, the Deputy PM appears to suggest that intelligence might actually justify the US attack. A targeted attack which reportedly murdered 165 Iranian schoolgirls. Therefore, Lammy seems to believe that the precision bomb reportedly dropped by US forces on an all-girls primary school in Minab could be ‘legitimate’ under international law.
Rightfully, there was uproar from Western politicians when Israeli children were killed on October 7th, 2023. However, if Palestine and Iran have taught us anything, it is that governments in the West are more than happy to ignore the mass murder of brown children altogether. A sinister viewpoint that will be a stain on our society in the decades to come.
Hypocrisy
Lammy has been more than happy to call out war crimes against white people, at the hands of those he is publicly against such as Putin in Russia. Yet his silence now just exposes the duplicitous nature of this despicable man’s compassion and understanding:
Horrific reports from Bucha of mass graves and bodies strewn across streets.
I have no doubt war crimes are being committed.
We need a special tribunal to prosecute Vladimir Putin personally for his war of aggression.
— David Lammy (@DavidLammy) April 3, 2022
Nevertheless, we have long had to endure his duplicity, as the failed statesman repeatedly shows a woeful inability to recognise right from wrong. It also reinforces the sense that Lammy often avoids engaging with something as silly as honesty and transparency. Discussing his backroom dealings with Israeli Zionist official Gideon Sa’ar, Skwawkbox wrote in October:
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has refused to disclose notes concerning a ‘secret meeting’ in April between David Lammy, at the time Keir Starmer’s Foreign Secretary, and his Israeli counterpart Gideon Sa’ar – because they could be “open to misinterpretation” and might harm the UK’s relationship with (genocidal) Israel, Scottish paper The National has revealed. The FCDO blocked publication of any papers relating to the meeting.
Patrick Harvie, a Green party member of the Scottish Parliament described the government’s excuse for hiding details of the meeting as “dangerous“:
“The idea that the public cannot see these documents because we might misinterpret them seems extraordinary, and if that excuse is allowed to stand, it would set a dangerous precedent.”
Sickening from @DavidLammy he never has any problems condemning Russia and accusing it of war crimes. But when it comes to America and apartheid Israel he plays the Mr Bean card.
Is sad that a man who cut his political teeth on the right side of history opposing apartheid South… https://t.co/1UZa5YKIpK
— Martin L. Zinn (@MartinLZinn) March 6, 2026
History will judge
As with Palestine, the government refuses to acknowledge crimes committed by its allies. As in October, perhaps Lammy believes the British public will ‘misinterpret’ the law and wrongly assume that everyone lives under the same rules-based order and that all lives hold equal value. That would surely scupper relations with Zionist US and Israel. After all, our leaders clearly believe that factors of religion or race should absolutely determine whether governments condemn mass murder.
Instead, the Starmer government refuse to apply independent legal reasoning and choose to continue this pattern of duplicity, placing US and Israeli interests above Britain’s own. This might be rewarding right now, leaving elected officials with heavier pockets and increased comfort. But the history books will not write kindly of those who refused to say ‘stop’ to tyrannical maniacs.
They may apply one sordid rule to the US and its allies and another to those they seek to dominate.
But justice, sooner or later, always prevails.
Featured image via the Canary
New data from the House of Commons Department of environment, food and rural affairs (DEFRA) committee has exposed the debt collection practices of robber-baron water companies.
These water companies are sending bailiffs to tens of thousands of homes across England and Wales. Often, the debts they’re collecting on are for less that £1,000.
DEFRA committee chair Alistair Carmichael MP said:
It is interesting and concerning to see the extent of their use of bailiffs over time and to see such differing approaches. The figures should be seen in the context of various cost of living shocks that have hit households over recent years.
For any family or individual to be subject to legal action is no small matter and can be a cause of severe stress and anxiety. We would urge any company to review its practices and ensure they are as sparing and compassionate as possible. We have referred this information to Citizens Advice and the Consumer Council for Water for further scrutiny.
Water companies: one rule for them, another for us
As Carmichael alluded to, the collection methods the suppliers employ vary massively according to where you are in the UK. Overall, Yorkshire Water, Southern Water, and South West Water (SWW) made the heaviest use of bailiffs, when the data is adjusted for population. Meanwhile, Wessex Water hasn’t used bailiffs for over a decade.
However, other companies also made massive use of debt collectors on specific years. For example, Severn Trent sent bailiffs out 11,574 times over 2022. Even more egregiously, Southern Water instructed bailiffs a staggering 15,707 times in 2019.
Labour MP John McDonnell highlighted the fact that water companies have broken the law hundreds of times in recent years, with little real backlash. He said that:
Only five directors of water companies have been prosecuted in the last 30 years. Contrast that with the thousands of mainly poor people the water companies set the bailiffs on each year.
The system is more interested in prosecuting families that are struggling to pay their water bills than the company directors responsible for pollutin g our rivers and seas while lining their pockets from profiteering at the expense of both their customers and our environment.
With that in mind, let’s take a look at what the suppliers have to say for themselves, shall we?
Yorkshire Water
A Yorkshire Water spokesperson said:
Our focus for any customer entering arrears is to assess vulnerability and provide support where necessary, through early engagement, financial support schemes, clear communications and signposting to external assistance with financial issues. Enforcement action is a last resort and is only taken against customers who we determine, using internal data and external credit agencies, have the ability to pay their bill but are choosing not to.
Well that’s nice, isn’t it? Only, Yorkshire Water has done some other fucking around with people’s debts recently, haven’t they?
Labour recently introduced a 15% cap on the amount that the DWP could take from people’s benefits to pay off debt. Yorkshire Water used this as an excuse to complain that it would lose out on that debt collection. Previously, it made £11m a year from the DWP garnishing benefits.
So yeah, Yorkshire Water claims that it only sends bailiffs to the houses of those who can afford it. They just forgot to mention that, until April 2025, they had the DWP doing the bailiffs’ job for them.
Southern Water
A Southern Water spokesperson said:
We work hard to ensure customers who are struggling get the support they need, such as our social tariff schemes. We’re delivering our biggest ever investment plan, spending around £8.5bn to meet the expectations of our customers in protecting the environment and improving services.
£8.5bn is an awfully large number. What a magnificent investment in Southern Water’s infrastructure. Only, maintaining that infrastructure and protecting the environment is literally a water company’s job.
Southern Water’s spokesperson regrettably failed to mention that it needs to invest that much because it hasn’t been doing its job. In the Environmental Agency’s most recent report, Southern Water was guilty of 15 serious pollution incidents. This made it the second worst environmental offender in the country.
Then, of course, there’s the small matter that we already paid to fix the shoddy infrastructure with our past bills.
South West Water
A South West Water spokesperson said:
We only ever use enforcement action as a last resort. Our priority is always to support customers who are struggling, and we offer a wide range of financial support.
Lovely, that – mind you, there’d probably be a bit more financial support available if SWW weren’t also busy awarding its CEO a massive £300,000 pay rise.
Meanwhile, the water that SWW delivered to Devon was so riddled with parasites that it caused an outbreak of diarrhoea in 2024. Just two days ago, on 4 March, SWW pleaded guilty to the criminal offence of causing those infections. They affected 2,500 homes, causing 150 people to fall ill.
According to the Guardian, SWW will likely face a fine of “hundreds of thousands of pounds”. In the same year as the outbreak, Pennon Group – SWW’s parent company – announced an 8.6% increase in its underlying operating profits, bringing the total to £166.3m.
Thieves and thugs
There are words for the likes of Yorkshire Water, Southern Water, South West Water and their CEOs. Unfortunately, we’re not allowed to publish most of them.
For now, we’ll settle for calling them a pack of state-sanctioned thieves in command of an army of thugs. These companies profit from a monopoly on fucking water, the most essential resource of life.
They claim they need money for infrastructure maintenance, but for some strange reason, the infrastructure isn’t maintained. When we don’t pay, they set the bailiffs on us. When they don’t pay, they get a slap on the wrist and an insignificant fine – and they still pay out dividends to the shareholders.
Fines are not enough. Ofwat and the Environmental Agency are not enough. The courts are not enough. Only stripping these companies of their control over our water will end the – very literal – shitshow that is privatisation.
Featured image via the Canary
Hackney Green Party has proudly welcomed councillor Soraya Adejare to sit with the Green Group at Hackney council’s annual budget meeting. It marked a powerful moment for progressive politics in the borough.
Adejare has previously served as the Speaker of Hackney. She’s worked for Hackney residents for more than a decade. During that time, she’s built a reputation as a fearless advocate for working-class communities, social and private housing tenants and those too often ignored by the political establishment.
Adejare grew up in Hackney and lives in social housing. She has long used her position to challenge injustice. And she ensures residents’ voices get heard at the highest levels of decision-making.
Adejare said in the council chamber as she crossed the floor:
It is troubling for me, having sat in this chamber for 12 years, and over the past decade making repeated calls for more funding, and recognising the damage that the Conservatives’ fiscal approach did to our borough. That being said, the approach of the current government does not meet our needs, irrespective of the pots of funding it provides for us.
I have a 12 year old daughter who has seen no material benefits throughout her lifetime, and that’s likely to continue as we’re encouraged to make increasing cuts.
Supporting the ongoing approach to the budget is totally unacceptable to me and I think it does a disservice to many people in our community, inclusive of many families like mine.
I’d like to thank colleagues who supported me through an incredibly difficult time, amidst a kind of institutional racism I experienced within the [Labour] Party. Likewise, the few that approached me subsequent to the death of my mother.
I will be walking across the chamber and supporting the Greens.
Green councillor and Green Group co-leader Zoë Garbett said:
Tonight we are so proud to welcome Soraya to join the Hackney Green Party. Her move to join the Green Group sends a clear message: Hackney residents deserve representatives who will stand up for their communities, not simply follow party lines.
Soraya has the respect of residents for her bold advocacy. She fights for residents who deserve decent and affordable housing, youth services, and against racist policing. We look forward to fighting for the people of Hackney together.
The Hackney Green Group warmly welcomes councillor Adejare and looks forward to working with her to deliver on the issues that matter most to residents: tackling the housing crisis, protecting public services and ensuring the borough’s politics reflects the communities it serves.
Featured image via Hackney Green Party
The founder of, We Own It, a public ownership campaign group, caused a stir on social media after calling for the continued privatisation of Thames Water.
The discussion centred around whether the special administration regime (SAR) measures the Lib Dems are calling for will go far enough in fixing the problem of unaccountable water companies. As the Canary’s Alex/Rose Cocker has reported:
They [water companies] claim they need money for infrastructure maintenance, but for some strange reason, the infrastructure isn’t maintained. When we don’t pay, they set the bailiffs on us. When they don’t pay, they get a slap on the wrist and an insignificant fine – and they still pay out dividends to the shareholders.
Fines are not enough. Ofwat and the Environmental Agency are not enough. The courts are not enough. Only stripping these companies of their control over our water will end the – very literal – shitshow that is privatisation.
While special administration can have some short-term benefits, it cannot be a sustainable long term strategy. And, this is primarily because only public ownership will ensure that everyone has access to clean and affordable water.
The Canary sat down with We Own It to find out what all the fuss is about.
We Own It: for permanent public ownership of water
In a social media post Cat Hobbs, We Own It’s director, commended a speech by Lib Dem leader Tim Farron. Specifically, Farron was advocating for so-called “new ownership models” for the debt-laden failing water utility:
Absolutely brilliant to see Tim Farron, Lib Dem environment spokesperson calling for Thames Water to have a new ownership model👏👏👏 https://t.co/LiO93kantu
— Cat Hobbs (@CatHobbs) February 14, 2026
Many on X rightly pointed out that this is really just a euphemism for alternative forms of privatisation.
However, Hobbs clarified to comments on X that she wasn’t in fact calling for these “new ownership models”.
The Canary also confirmed with We Own It that it still stands for full nationalisation of the England and Wales water sector.
We Own It’s lead campaigner on water, Sophie Conquest, explained how the group views these as a distraction from achieving full nationalisation of public services.
So just what had Hobbs meant?
Hobbs separately explained to the Canary how her comment was about rewarding politicians:
when they do the right thing. And we criticize them when they do the wrong thing.
In particular, she was applauding Farron’s support for bringing Thames Water into special administration.
The government could do this through a legal mechanism known as the Special Administration Regime (SAR).
Special Administration Regime: a route to nationalising Thames Water?
As We Own It explains, SAR:
will involve a financial restructuring and it will then be transferred to a new owner.
Crucially, it argues that the new owner:
should be a publicly owned and accountable regional water company.
Public ownership-focused think tank Common Wealth has described how the government could use SAR to fully nationalise water companies. Crucially for a start, it has the option of putting it into SAR on poor performance grounds. The government can do this if a company is failing in its statutory duties. This route to SAR is unique to water – other sectors can only apply it for financial insolvency. But as Common Wealth has laid out, on untreated sewage spills, every single water company in England meets this performance threshold.
One of the advantages of SAR is that it gives the government the option to deny shareholders and bondholders any ‘compensation’. Common Wealth explained how shareholders and creditors would have to argue their case in court, but that profiting from pollution would be:
a violation of the “polluter pays” principle.
Reinforcing Common Wealth’s zero compensation plan, Conquest told the Canary:
They’ve run the asset into the ground, they’ve already taken out more than they’ve put in, therefore they should be compensated nothing.
Incompatible ideas on SAR
However, there is one glaring issue with SAR: the risk of re-privatisation.
To a business buddy-buddy Labour government, renationalisation is unsurprisingly, a loaded term. In a factsheet around its 2025 Water (Special Measures) Bill, it went to great length to distance SAR from nationalisation.
This is perhaps its major drawback – that the government essentially views it as a mechanism for re-privatising a failing utility.
In short, SAR wouldn’t be implemented in a vacuum. We Own It wants to use SAR as a “stepping stone” to permanent public ownership. The government views it as a last resort option for transferring ownership into new private hands.
So how is We Own It planning to prevent this?
Permanent public ownership: no guarantee
The short answer is: backbench MPs.
Its current strategy for what comes if/when SAR is in place revolves around a pledge to public ownership campaign. Conquest said:
our focus has been very much using our time now to convince MPs that public ownership is in the best interest of their constituents. And that’s included the cost of living crisis – that has become much more of a priority for MPs. And I think water addresses that. We can cut water bills if we have permanent public ownership. So MP pledges become a big part of that.
The thinking seems to be that a groundswell of parliamentary support would change the government’s position.
Of course, this might not be out of the realm of possibility. For instance, the backbench backlash over disability benefit cuts meant that the government did pause on its plans for Personal Independence Payment (PIP). However, it took the immense work of disabled campaigners to get MPs to oppose the cuts.
Nevertheless, We Own It recognises relying on backbenchers to move a corporate-captured Labour government is a tall order. After all, this is the same cronyist Cabinet continuing to cite renationalisation cost estimates that the water industry itself funded. And Hobbs noted former environment Steve Reed’s connections to the water industry. This of course includes his links to Peter Mandelson – whose consultancy company Global Counsel had lobbied for water corporations.
So far, We Own It’s pledge campaign has drawn support from just 19 MPs. Naturally, this largely comprises Greens, Independents, and left-leaning Labour MPs.
Despite this, Conquest suggested that there are:
potentially MPs who might not be speaking about this issue now, who will feel when Thames Water comes into special administration, that it’s really untenable for this utility around which there’s been so much controversy, so much anger, for that to be reprivatised at the expense of taxpayers.
She pointed to economist professor Dieter Helm’s discussions on the future of Thames Water. Notably, he has also suggested that:
once a Special Administrator is brought in, its backbenchers will push for full renationalisation. Most of them, at least privately, like this option.
An uphill battle
Ultimately though, what it boils down to is that We Own It believes SAR makes “the most sense strategically” to campaign for.
This is because there is precedent. Conquest and Hobbs gave Railtrack – now Network Rail – as an example where a previous UK government (Cameron’s Conservative administration no less) implemented public ownership after SAR.
Nevertheless, any campaign strategy for permanent public ownership will face an incredibly uphill battle with this neoliberal Labour shower.
Featured image via the Canary
Anti-immigration protestors gather outside Edinburgh block of flats after ‘knife incident’
From Designer Dogs to Native Reptiles, the Trends in the $33B Industry
Ethereum Ecosystem Hits $15B in Tokenized RWAs and $1T in Aave Loans in a Single Month
-
Politics4 days agoAlan Cumming Brands Baftas Ceremony A ‘Triggering S**tshow’
-
Tech6 days agoUnihertz’s Titan 2 Elite Arrives Just as Physical Keyboards Refuse to Fade Away
-
NewsBeat6 days agoAbusive parents will now be treated like sex offenders and placed on a ‘child cruelty register’ | News UK
-
Business6 hours ago
Form 8K Entergy Mississippi LLC For: 6 March
-
NewsBeat6 days agoDubai flights cancelled as Brit told airspace closed ’10 minutes after boarding’
-
Sports7 days ago
The Vikings Need a Duck
-
NewsBeat6 days agoThe empty pub on busy Cambridge road that has been boarded up for years
-
NewsBeat5 days ago‘Significant’ damage to boarded-up Horden house after fire
-
Tech2 days agoBitwarden adds support for passkey login on Windows 11
-
Entertainment5 days agoBaby Gear Guide: Strollers, Car Seats
-
Sports1 day ago499 runs and 34 sixes later, India beat England to enter T20 World Cup final | Cricket News
-
Politics6 days ago
FIFA hypocrisy after Israel murder over 400 Palestinian footballers
-
NewsBeat5 days agoEmirates confirms when flights will resume amid Dubai airport chaos
-
NewsBeat4 days agoIs it acceptable to comment on the appearance of strangers in public? Readers discuss
-
Tech6 days agoViral ad shows aged Musk, Altman, and Bezos using jobless humans to power AI
-
Video4 days agoHow to Build Finance Dashboards With AI in Minutes
-
Fashion5 days agoOn the Scene at the 57th Annual NAACP Image Awards: Teyana Taylor in Black Ashi Studio, Colman Domingo in Yellow Sergio Hudson, Chloe Bailey in Christian Siriano, and More!
-
Business3 days agoGuthrie Disappearance Enters Fifth Week as Family Visits Memorial
-
Crypto World6 days agoUS Judge Lets Binance Unregistered Token Class Action Proceed
-
NewsBeat5 days agoUkraine-Russia war latest: Belgium releases video showing forces boarding Russian shadow fleet oil tanker