Why calling out for ‘Jessica’ stops toddler tantrums

Why shouting ‘Jessica’ isn’t a long-term tantrum fix

Emotion coaching and validating their feelings can help in the long-term

Delegates at two conferences for teachers’ unions have confronted education ministers about the Irish government’s ongoing failure to pass legislation limiting trade with so-called ‘Israel’ via the Occupied Territories Bill.

Attendees at the Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) annual congress met minister for further and higher education James Lawless with chants of “enact the Occupied Territories Bill”. At the equivalent gathering for the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO), teachers demanded the same of minister for education and youth Hildegarde Naughton.

Successive governments have stalled on passing the legislation for a staggering eight years since Independent TD Frances Black first introduced the then Control of Economic Activities (Occupied Territories) Bill in 2018. It is now known as the The Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill, but is typically still referred to as the Occupied Territories Bill (OTB).

Micheál Martin’s government has done everything possible to stymie progress of the bill, often claiming legal complexities as the key cause of delay. In reality the Genocide Convention – which requires signatories to prevent and punish acts of genocide – trumps the concerns Martin has raised. Halting all trade with the Zionist entity would be an effective way to adhere to the state’s responsibilities under the Convention.

Occupied Territories Bill restricting trade with ‘Israel’ weakened to help multinationals

In January the Taoiseach let slip the real reasons for the hold up – the negative effects for big companies operating in Ireland. Martin described the services element of the bill as “completely non-implementable”, and went on to say:

There would also be an impact for Irish multinationals, or multinationals based in Ireland. We need to be clear eyed about that, and people need to realise that and know about that.

Foreign affairs spokesperson for Labour Duncan Smith pointed out the obvious when saying Martin’s move was:

…a political choice, and it is the wrong one.

Martin has whined that the bill would “be very, very limited indeed” on its “impact on Israeli policy”. If watered down as much as Martin would like, yes. On its own and without other countries following suit, yes. However, a bill banning all trade with the Zionist pseudo-state would have a significant effect, given Ireland is the largest per-capita importer of goods from the terrorist regime. If followed by similar bills across the world, it would have a devastating impact on the apartheid economy.

When News Chambers confronted Tánaiste Simon Harris at the end of March if the OTB should be expedited, Harris claimed that:

…it’s being worked on as fast as it can…

He again cited vague legal concerns. No one would seek lengthy legal advice before smashing a car window on a hot day to rescue a suffocating baby. Similarly, the continuing atrocities of the Zionist land thieves warrant immediate response. In both examples, strong action taken should be easily legally defensible as a means of preventing a greater harm.

Delegates at the INTO conference passed a motion condemning the government’s failure to enact the OTB. They also included in that motion a demand that Irish schools adopt an ethical procurement policy in compliance with UN standards on human rights. A key part of this would involved ending trade with the Zionist entity. It would also mean adhering to policies laid down by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against the terrorist regime in Tel Aviv.

GAA still under pressure for Allianz support

INTO members also put the spotlight back on the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) for their continued partnership with Allianz. The German insurance giant was named by UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese in her landmark Economy of Genocide report. The company pumps vast sums into the criminal Zionist economy via investment in shares and bonds there. The GAA allow Allianz to sponsor its events.

INTO members’ particular focus is on Cumann na mBunscol, who promote and organise Gaelic Games in primary schools. The Allianz logo features prominently on their web page. It is self-evidently obscene to have this criminal company’s name attached to children’s sport, at the same time as it aids the massacre of children in Palestine.

INTO General Secretary John Boyle emphasised this message, saying there:

…can be no hiding place for those who cause the deliberate destruction of childhood.

Referencing the OTB, he went on to say that:

We need a government that shows the courage once demonstrated by the Dunnes Stores workers who helped bring an end to apartheid in South Africa – a government willing to enact the Occupied Territories Bill and show that Ireland will not be complicit in human rights’ violations.

This is indeed the example to look to. The Irish government in 1987 enacted a ban on importation of all apartheid South African products following a three year campaign against such items by the Dunnes Stores strikers.

In 2012, Desmond Tutu described apartheid ‘Israel’ as worse than its South African counterpart. Now it not only perpetrates apartheid, it carries out genocide. Rather than delays followed by a watered down version of the OTB, Martin’s government must move towards a ban of all trade with the illegitimate settler-colony.

Featured image via the Canary

Catherine Barnard and Denzil Davidson explain why negotiations on a youth experience scheme between the UK and the EU are so complex. 

A UK-EU deal on youth mobility or ‘youth experience’, was always going to be fraught. Stopping free movement of people was the issue that clinched victory for the Leave side in the Brexit referendum. Yet many think that limited-time work/study opportunities for young people should continue. However, there is a problem with legal competence – the power for the EU to negotiate a full-fat youth mobility scheme enabling young people to travel, study and, crucially, work. This blog explains the problem and considers what can be done.

The Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), the current basis on which the EU and UK trade with each other, makes only limited provision for individuals to move between EU member states and the UK. They must be providing services on a temporary basis as, for example, independent professionals or short-term business visitors, and the type of business they do must be listed in the annex. So, researchers or consultants can move but musicians and artists cannot because their professions are not listed in the annex. Currently, anyone wishing to move from the UK to the EU or vice-versa to study or work must rely on the vagaries of the national law of the EU member state in question. Hence the call for a youth mobility scheme benefitting the 18-30s as part of the UK-EU reset to make this easier.

While the UK and the EU share a vision on the breadth (and benefits of) the youth experience scheme, they have different substantive priorities. For the EU, it is access to UK universities for EU students on the same terms as UK nationals i.e. at lower ‘home’ fees (something that was not in the 2025 Common Understanding between the EU and UK). For the UK, it is the opportunity for the young to work, study and travel and a potential, reviewable cap on numbers of EU nationals coming.

The UK already has highly flexible, albeit capped, youth mobility schemes with 13 countries. Armed with a visa (on payment of a £319 fee and the health surcharge of £776 p.a.) and with savings of £2,530, the young person is free to come to the UK for two to three years to study, to work, to travel or to do nothing at all (and to switch between these activities), with no requirement to be sponsored by an employer. This is the UK’s vision for the EU/UK scheme.

By contrast, the EU itself has no youth mobility schemes. It has Directive 2016/801 which allows third country nationals to come to an EU member state for research, studies, training and voluntary service pupil exchanges, and to be an au pair, but not to work more generally. Individual member states have their own youth mobility schemes and it is the national mobility schemes which allow individuals to come to, say, France to work.

Herein lies the rub. The EU can negotiate a deal with the UK only in areas where it has competence. Its mandate, while broader than five years ago, does not explicitly extend to work. Further, Article 79(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) reserves to member states the right to determine ‘the volume of admission’ of third country nationals coming to their countries to work. This includes not just numbers but other conditions, such as a labour market test or sectoral limitations.

The EU’s lack of competence is one explanation for why the UK tried to negotiate bilateral schemes with France, Germany, Spain after Brexit: it’s the individual states who can agree to the terms on work. However, the UK was blocked by the European Commission which objected to the ‘differential treatment of Union citizens’.

Yet, the 2025 Common Understanding said that a youth experience scheme should facilitate the participation of young people from the EU and UK in ‘various activities, such as work, studies, au-pairing, volunteering, or simply travelling, for a limited period of time’. The Commission now worries that it does not have the legal competence to negotiate this ‘full-fat’ deal. It is dependent on the member states to deliver on commitments about work and the fear is that under Article 79(5), France, say, could set the figure on UK nationals coming to work in France at zero. So, it seems that the Commission has stopped bilateral deals without having the power to negotiate an EU-wide replacement.

Is there any way out of the impasse?

The legal basis (i.e. EU power) to adopt Directive 2016/801 was Article 79(2)(a) and (b) TFEU. This gives the EU the powers to regulate (a) ‘the conditions of entry and residence, and standards on the issue by member states of long-term visas and residence permits’ and (b) the definition of the rights of third-country nationals residing legally in a member state. One argument would be that the reference to ‘rights of third country nationals’ should include the right to work. The Blue Card Directive 2021/1883, adopted under the same legal basis, lays down ‘the conditions of entry and residence for more than 3 months in the territory of the member states, and the rights, of third-country nationals for the purpose of highly qualified employment and of their family members’. But that does not deal with the problem of Article 79(5).

If the Commission and the member states will not accept full competence under Article 79(2), another solution could be a framework or ‘mixed’ agreement, whereby the European Commission negotiates on matters which are under national competence but any resulting agreement requires member state ratification for it to come into force. This is complicated by the British desire for a UK-EU youth mobility agreement to secure youth mobility for British citizens not only to individual member states but enabling them to move across the EU more broadly, at least between two or three states, a matter on which the Commission’s competence is also uncertain.

Alternatively, there is a Canadian model: Canada has bilateral youth mobility agreements with 21 EU member states but no EU wide framework. An agreement could be made on non-work mobility between the UK and the European Commission, with a commitment that bilateral agreements on work would follow. But this may be unsatisfactory in two ways: first, the EU could obtain its ask on study without the UK ask on work being guaranteed, so some form of carrot and stick needs to be built into the agreement together with a review mechanism, and, second, it could mean precisely the differential treatment by nationality that the Commission wishes to avoid.

Some political flexibility and legal creativity are, therefore, needed if a youth experience scheme is to be agreed in time for a summit in early summer. The UK, the EU and its member states will need to understand that the benefits of a youth mobility agreement will be balanced and will be delivered by all sides. And since the Common Understanding’s other work strands in agrifood (SPS) and emissions trading form a package deal with youth mobility, the summer summit may lack substance if that flexibility and creativity is not found.

By Catherine Barnard, Professor in European Union Law and Employment Law, University of Cambridge and Denzil Davidson.

Why use a pelvic floor trainer?

Don’t make us download another app, please! Thankfully, this techy trainer helps you understand your pelvic floor engagement without the need for an app (or sharing your data) by vibrating when you’re engaging properly as a little treat to your G-spot. It has eight modes to give you something to work towards – just like a training routine in the gym.

Just as you’d lift weights in the gym, weighted beads can help tone your vaginal muscles. And it’s totally not a vanity thing: instead, it’s a way to get stronger pelvic floor muscles and with that, more powerful (and pleasurable) orgasms. Not convinced you’ll make time for them? Don’t worry, you can multitask wear them while running, walking, and even swimming for a bit of extra excitement.

These balls are also weighted, but come in three sizes so you can gradually work your way up to the strongest. They’re coated in silky silicone, so you don’t have to worry about forcing them in (although adding some water-based lube wouldn’t go amiss), which also makes for an easy clean up when you’re done.

Intimina

Worried you don’t know your own strength? Never fear, this Intimina trainer uses touch sensors to tailor a regime tailored to your needs. It’s anatomically shaped, so it doesn’t feel like an intrusive object (ahem) up there, and it will automatically adjust your program over time to help you reach peak pelvic strength.

Invisible technology can sometimes be a little off-putting, we get it. If you like to know what’s going on down there, this medical-looking trainer lets you choose your own setting depending on what kind of training programme you’re after, and then remembers it for the next time around. It even comes with a handy booklet to teach you exactly how to do a pelvic floor exercise – with or without the machine.

Honestly, we’re not adding anything into our routines if it isn’t easy and affordable – and this kegel trainer ticks both of those boxes. Not only is it smooth to insert thanks to the silicone coating, but the remote control lights up to show its five levels that vibrate as well as tone.

Crystal lovers, unite! This seriously classy set contains two rose quartz eggs to help you ‘channel your inner energy’. Beginners will want to start with just one in the single silicone egg holder, and progress to two for deeper muscle engagement. Best of all, when you’re done you can pop them into that vegan leather case (just make sure you wash them first!).

How often should you train your pelvic floor?

Just a couple of hours before the alleged two-week ceasefire between Iran and the US-Israel axis, the US bombed Iran’s largest aluminium works. A huge explosion that ripped through the Arak aluminium factory in central Iran was captured in footage broadcast on Iranian local media:

The US have again showed complete disregard for the health of Iranian civilians. Fumes or vapour from burning aluminium have some of the most serious health impacts on those forced to breathe it in, from incurable respiratory conditions, to bone degeneration, to Alzheimers-like neurological breakdown:

• Pulmonary fibrosis: inhalation of aluminium vapour or fine dust can lead to the incurable condition pulmonary fibrosis, one of the most appalling and distressing breathing diseases. Lung tissue hardens and scars, making it progressively more impossible to draw breath. Always terminal, life expectancy is usually less than five years.
• Alveolar proteinosis: in this disease, air sacs in the lungs become filled with protein. While symptoms can be treated – through distressing ‘whole lung lavage‘ – it cannot be cured and leads to recurring bacterial and/or fungal infections.
• Metal fume fever: acute exposure can cause flu-like illness with fever, chills, metallic taste in the mouth, headache, breathing difficulties and cough, along with underlying lung damage and blood toxicity.
• Neurological effects: high exposure can affect the central nervous system, decreasing neurological performance in memory, learning, attention, causing tremors and physical degeneration of the brain. Symptoms can be so severe that they are misdiagnosed as Alzheimer’s disease.
• Bone diseases: aluminium accumulation can disrupt bone renewal, leading to osteoporosis and other bone-weakening diseases.

Trump ordered this strike knowing that a deal – at least a claimed one – was close, after threatening to destroy Iranian civilisation for ever. War criminal.

Featured image via the Canary

Callum Murphy is the Director of Campaigns for the Conservative Friends of the Overseas Territories and is standing as a Conservative candidate in Canary Wharf. Luke Robert Black MBE is the Director of Engagement for the Next Gen Tories and standing as a Conservative candidate in Canning Town.

As Conservative candidates in Canary Wharf and Canning Town respectively, we are campaigning among voters who are often described in fixed terms: younger, diverse, urban – and assumed to be politically out of reach for the Conservative Party.

But on the doorstep, the reality is more fluid – and more promising.

Across East London, we are meeting a generation in their twenties, thirties and forties building careers in a modern, service-driven economy. They are renting at high cost, drowning in service charges, paying significant sums in tax, and trying to establish themselves in one of the most competitive cities in the world.

They are ambitious. They are hard-working. And they want to get on.

These are not voters who reject aspiration – they live and breathe it. The question is whether we are matching that aspiration with a credible Conservative offer.

For too long, we have not done so clearly enough. That has now changed.

Kemi’s New Deal for Young People represents a conscious shift back towards the priorities of this generation: home ownership, rewarding work, and the ability to build a secure future. Not at all departure from Conservative principles, but a sharper application of them to modern urban life.

It’s a genuine four-point plan we can point to on the doorstep – removing fiscal burdens on young people like Rachel Reeves’s graduate tax grab, helping to remove some of the costs of getting onto the ladder and celebrating young people for the vital contribution they make to our economy. That matters, because the pressures these voters face are real – and increasingly shared.

Housing is the clearest example. For a generation doing the right things – studying, working, contributing – the prospect of owning a home still matters, but feels distant for too many. High rents and constrained supply shape everyday decisions, from career moves to starting a family.

We should be honest about that frustration. But we should also be clear about the answer.

A serious Conservative approach means being serious about acknowledging the principles of supply and demand. This means building significantly more homes. It means building them faster, building them more beautifully, building them larger and building them in the places that people want to live.

Densifying gently in areas where there are transport links, job opportunities and cultural interests. Young Londoners want to live near the action. They want to live a reasonable tube ride from All Points East festival, Drumsheds or a good gym. They want to be able to enjoy this city’s restaurants, galleries, parks, theatres, cafes, bars and clubs. They want to enjoy the city they live in. They also want to acquire, accumulate and grow their wealth – don’t we all? So, restoring a property-owning democracy is not simply good policy; it is essential to restoring belief that the system rewards effort and allows people to enjoy their lives.

Alongside housing sits a second pressure: the sense of being overtaxed without getting ahead.

Many younger professionals we speak to are earning well by national standards, but do not feel secure. The combination of high living costs and the tax burden leaves them stretched, even as they do everything that should lead to progress. Plan 2 graduates feel this the most.

They are not asking for handouts. But they do expect fairness – a system where work is rewarded and advancement is possible.

This is where Kemi’s New Deal is politically important. A clearer commitment to growth, to lowering the burden on work, and to making it easier to build a family and a future speaks directly to lived experience – not abstract notions of what young people want.

And when that argument is made with confidence, it lands.

This is made even more salient when Labour’s taxation has catapulted the job prospects of young people into new territory – with the highest rate of unemployment in Europe – and Reform accuses young people of not doing ‘real work’, being lazy and working less hard than the nation’s pensioners. It’s a clear distinction that is becoming clearer every day – as a generation of ambitious, young, thoughtful people look for a party to place their trust in.

One of the most striking features of campaigning in our areas is the response to a pro-growth message. These are voters working in industries that drive Britain forward – finance, technology, construction, logistics. They want a country that is open, competitive and ambitious.

They do not want managed decline. They want opportunity.

That is a Conservative argument – and once again we are willing to make it.

At a local level, the expectations are straightforward: safe streets, clean neighbourhoods, and services that function properly. But beneath that sits something deeper – a demand for competence, seriousness and accountability.

That, too, should play to Conservative strengths.

Encouragingly, we are beginning to see the party respond – not just in policy, but in people. Across London, a new generation of Conservative candidates is stepping forward, rooted in their communities and shaped by the same pressures as the voters they seek to represent. This was shown last month as more than 180 under-35s standing as local Tory council candidates met to kick off their campaign.

That credibility matters. It signals that we are not just talking about these voters, we are starting to reflect them.What we are seeing on the doorstep is not entrenched opposition, but an open question.

Many younger urban voters already share core Conservative instincts: belief in aspiration, support for enterprise, and a desire for a fair link between effort and reward. What has been missing is a clear, modern offer that connects those instincts to their everyday lives. That gap is now beginning to close.

If we continue to do so – serious on housing, serious on growth, serious about helping people get on – then the assumptions that have long defined urban politics will start to shift. There is more to do – but the opening is there for Kemi and our party.

And if we sustain that shift, then areas like Canary Wharf and Canning Town could not just be places where we compete, they could be central to how we win again.