Thomas Teevan speaks at the opening of Largy Hall

10 min read23 min

Reverend James Godfrey MacManaway, a clergyman soldier turned parliamentarian, and his political heir Thomas Leslie Teevan, a brilliant young lawyer and public servant, are barely Westminster footnotes. Both served as Belfast West MP for less than a year.

And yet their story embodies a sense of promise broken by legal anomaly, electoral mischance, and personal tragedy.

James Godfrey MacManaway was born into an ecclesiastical family as the son of Rt Rev Dr James MacManaway, Bishop of Clogher. He was educated at Campbell College and Trinity College Dublin. Aged just 16, while still at Campbell College, he enlisted to fight in the First World War, seeing action at the Battle of Loos and later joining the Royal Flying Corps. In 1923, he was ordained by the archbishop of Armagh and served a curacy at Drumachose, Limavady, before moving to Christ Church, where he became rector in 1930 and remained for 17 years; in 1926, he married Catherine Anne Trench.

During the Second World War, MacManaway again “took the King’s shilling”, serving as senior chaplain to the forces. He experienced the evacuation of Dunkirk with the 12th Royal Lancers, later serving in the Middle East with the First Armoured Division and returning in 1945 to the Italian Front as senior chaplain to the 10th Armoured Division, a service for which he was awarded the MBE.

Contemporaries remembered him as one of the most colourful figures in the Church of Ireland, a gifted storyteller who could hold an audience spellbound, sometimes allowing his imagination to outrun accuracy. A favourite anecdote described him swimming for two hours after his Dunkirk vessel was hit, only for his wife to puncture the tale by reminding everyone that he could not swim at all – a story that captured both his flair and the affectionate tolerance of those around him.

By 1947, MacManaway resigned his Church of Ireland post and turned to politics, successfully contesting the city of Londonderry seat at Stormont as a Unionist, winning by a majority of 4,028 and again taking over 60 per cent of the vote in 1949. His oratorical gifts and colourful personality quickly established him as a notable figure at the parliament of Northern Ireland.

His ambitions soon extended to Westminster. As an ordained clergyman, doubts arose over his eligibility, but he sought legal advice from Edmund Warnock, attorney general of Northern Ireland, who advised that the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland in 1869 meant earlier statutory bars on clergy sitting in the House of Commons did not apply.

On this advice, MacManaway resigned his remaining Church offices, relinquished his clerical rights and sought and obtained Ulster Unionist selection for Belfast West, a difficult marginal seat held by Labour’s Jack Beattie. After a vigorous campaign in the 1950 general election, assisted by activists including a young Ian Paisley, he defeated Beattie by 3,378 votes, becoming the first clergyman in 150 years to sit in the House of Commons.

His election caused a stir in Westminster, where few had anticipated that a disestablished Irish clergyman would gain a seat. The challenge came from Labour backbencher Maj Geoffrey Bing, and the issue was referred to a select committee, prompting strong Unionist defences of MacManaway, including from Winston Churchill, yet the committee declined to reach a decisive conclusion and recommended urgent legislation instead.

The matter went to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which identified a lacuna in the law: although the Irish Church Act 1869 disestablished the Church of Ireland, it did not expressly permit its clergy to sit as MPs, leaving in force the House of Commons (Clergy Disqualification) Act 1801, which barred any person ordained priest or deacon from sitting or voting.

The Privy Council held that the 1801 act applied not only to clergy of the established churches of England and Scotland but to anyone ordained by a bishop according to episcopal forms, which included the Church of Ireland. In contrast, ministers not episcopally ordained, such as those who would later include Rev Martin Smyth, Rev Robert Bradford and Rev Ian Paisley, were not similarly disqualified.

The House of Commons accepted the Privy Council’s view and, on 19 October 1950, resolved that MacManaway was disqualified, though it waived any financial penalties for the five divisions in which he had voted while ineligible. He protested bitterly against what he saw as an unjust anachronism and the ignoring of later legislation that allowed priests to sit if they renounced benefice, emoluments, and pension, but his Westminster career had lasted just 238 days.

The judgment also compelled him to resign his Stormont seat, as the same legal principle applied in Belfast. Personal tragedy followed swiftly: his wife died in January 1951; his health, never robust, declined sharply; his eyesight deteriorated so that he virtually lost one eye and was threatened with blindness in the other, and he could walk only with great difficulty and the aid of a stick.

MacManaway remained politically active despite infirmity and was severely injured when he tripped on the staircase of the Ulster Club in Belfast while on his way to address a meeting for his political heir, Thomas Leslie Teevan, the Unionist candidate for Belfast West. 

He died shortly after in the Royal Victoria Hospital, aged 53, the coroner finding that meningitis following a skull fracture from the fall was the cause of death, and remarking that he scarcely knew when to stop in service to causes such as that of Ulster.

Even before his death, MacManaway had recognised a successor. He did not contest the by-election triggered by his disqualification; instead, the Ulster Unionist Party selected 23-year-old Limavady Urban Council chairman Thomas Teevan, MacManaway’s godson, of whom he said he was glad that “the people chosen to take up the torch which he had not been allowed to continue to hold was another Limavady man”.

Thomas Leslie Teevan was born in Limavady in July 1927 into a family with deep roots in the town and a wider Cavan lineage marked by public service. Family tradition recounted ancestors who served as army medics and doctors, tended the wounded in turbulent times, and even survived the Charge of the Light Brigade, stories that underlined a long-standing engagement with Irish and British military history.

Educated at Limavady Academy, where he served as head boy, Teevan went on to study law at Queen’s University Belfast. After graduation, he became a lecturer in law, remembered for his vibrant personality, fellowship and capacity for friendship across social and sectarian boundaries.

Academically, Teevan was highly regarded. He combined intellectual rigour with a flair for exposition. Little wonder he quickly made his mark at the Bar. Belfast’s senior magistrate JH Campbell QC believed that, but for his early death, Teevan would have left an indelible imprint on the Northern Ireland legal profession – a view echoed by Charles Stewart QC, who described him simply as a “great lawyer” despite his short practising career.

Teevan’s public service began early. He became the youngest urban district councillor in Northern Ireland and rose to be chairman of Limavady urban district council. Wherever he entered an institution, be it Queen’s University, the council chamber, or later Parliament, he swiftly assumed responsibility and won trust. His warmth, wit and optimism enabled him to bridge divides and “love his fellow men regardless of creed”, an attribute widely remarked upon in later tributes.

The disqualification of MacManaway in 1950 created the opening that propelled Teevan onto the Westminster stage. Selected as Ulster Unionist candidate for the Belfast West by-election, he framed his campaign as the continuation of his godfather’s cause, calling on the “Loyalist community” to rally behind him as they had rallied behind MacManaway.

The by-election of 29 November 1950 proved a hard-fought contest. Teevan secured 31,796 votes (50.8 per cent) to Jack Beattie’s 30,833 (49.2 per cent), a majority of 913 on a turnout of 79.8 per cent, thereby becoming the ‘Baby of the House’, the youngest MP at that time. 

He entered Parliament on 5 December 1950 and, in 1951, spoke six times, including a maiden speech on 11 April during the budget and economic survey debates, concentrating particularly on the economic and social needs of Belfast West.

Teevan’s parliamentary tenure was brief, lasting 330 days. In the 1951 general election, he again faced Beattie in what became the narrowest result in the United Kingdom that year: both candidates secured 50.0 per cent of the vote, but Beattie polled 33,174 to Teevan’s 33,149, a margin of just 25 votes out of more than 66,000 cast.

This wafer-thin loss made Teevan not only one of the youngest MPs ever elected but also one of the youngest to lose his seat. The result underscored both his appeal and the volatility of Belfast West, where demographic and political shifts rendered Unionist representation precarious despite his personal popularity.

Defeat did not end Teevan’s public engagement. Called to the Bar in 1952, he continued to lecture in law at Queen’s University while maintaining his leadership role as chairman of Limavady urban district council, embodying a rare combination of academic, professional and civic commitments.

Across these spheres, he retained the same qualities admired in his student days: exuberance, loyalty to family and community, and an infectious optimism that could lift the burdens of those around him. Colleagues from different backgrounds acclaimed his capacity for friendship and his refusal to be constrained by the sectarian lines that shaped much of public life.

In October 1954, at just 27, Teevan died suddenly from severe pneumonia, prompting widespread grief in Limavady, at Queen’s and within the legal and political worlds of Northern Ireland. He was buried at Christ Church, Limavady, the same parish in which MacManaway was also buried and where their intertwined stories found a poignant convergence.

The sense of loss was captured in John Irvine’s poem ‘Ave Atque Vale’, which depicted neighbours and friends mourning a young man whose promise had been cut short, yet whose memory remained cherished. The verses, steeped in the imagery of rural funerals and quiet roads, framed Teevan’s passing as not only a private sorrow but a communal bereavement.

Following his death, friends and admirers from both sides of the Irish border contributed to memorials in Teevan’s honour. At Queen’s University Belfast, the faculty of law dedicated an oak chair and inscription in Celtic script, with senior members of the judiciary, local government and his family in attendance, a reflection of the breadth of his influence.

The fates of MacManaway and Teevan also raised broader questions about law, representation, and Unionism’s generational leadership. 

A House of Commons select committee in 1951 acknowledged the anomalies of the clergy disqualification laws exposed by the MacManaway case but recommended no immediate change, leaving the issue unresolved for half a century.

Only in 2001, amid the candidacy of former Roman Catholic priest David Cairns, did Parliament finally enact the Removal of Clergy Disqualification Act, lifting most remaining bars on ordained ministers sitting at Westminster – a relief that could have saved MacManaway. Differently, demographic change and the knife-edge defeat of 1951 ensured that Teevan’s promise as a Unionist standard-bearer for Belfast West would also remain unfulfilled.

Seen together, the stories of James Godfrey MacManaway and Thomas Leslie Teevan trace a distinct Limavady thread through church, war, law and politics in mid-20th-century Northern Ireland. 

Both were men of faith, intellect and service, shaped by family traditions that valued public duty and by a town that produced leaders capable of commanding respect across communities.

Their intertwined careers – rector and godson, MP and Baby of the House, both cut down in their prime – embody a sense of promise broken by legal anomaly, electoral mischance and personal tragedy. 

Yet in church records, university memorials, legal recollections and the collective memory of Limavady, the clergyman soldier and the lost leader remain enduring figures.

They are reminders of what Northern Ireland gained for a time, and what it lost too soon. 

Aaron Callan is senior parliamentary researcher for Gregory Campbell MP

The following is a repost of a piece by Areej Alghazzawi which Amnesty International published on 16 February.

Silent Traumas

Trauma follows us like our shadows during daylight. At night, trauma envelopes us until we feel like we are drowning.

Trauma also lives inside us like a disease. Good people in Geneva, New York, and The Hague say there is a cure, but we can’t inject their statements.

14-year-old Shorouq Thabet is the only survivor of her immediate family, who were all killed during Israel’s genocide. When I first asked her how she was, she simply responded with “nightmare”.

Adulthood is being forced on Shorouq, and she fights it by fantasising about being a young child again, when her only worry was wondering where her doll had wandered off to.

She longs to hear her parents’ voices; even their arguments could bring some comfort. They were killed in Deir Al-Balah following an Israeli attack on 17 March 2024. It was the last time she would sleep beside her mother and feel that special warmth. It was the last time she’d play with her younger sister, Shahed.

Destruction everywhere and in everyone in Gaza

Shorouq has been in therapy for some time now in the hope of learning to resist the darkness. Until now, there has been no relief. The smell and sight of destruction that is everywhere, and in everyone, in Gaza, open up the wounds again within seconds of leaving her therapy sessions.

On the night of the Israeli strike, she told me she had a strange feeling – that danger was in the room with them. She asked her mother to turn on a flashlight and hold her closely.

At some point, she said she managed to sleep, but when she woke, she was in a hospital. Her mother had survived the attack and was covered in blood:

She was frantically checking on me, my sister, and two brothers, Mohammed and Ahmad. I could see her but not feel her. I was going in and out of the darkness.

It was the first time she had seen her mother in such pain. Her mother’s face, covered in blood, is the last memory she has of her.

Her mother didn’t survive, nor did her father, little sister, or older brothers. The full details of her family massacre were only told to her when she was out of the hospital after seven days of urgent medical attention.

Everybody was crying. Nobody was talking.

Now she lives with her uncle Wael and his wife. I saw many people gathered at their home when Shorouq arrived. Everybody was crying. Nobody was talking.

A few days later, Shorouq told me:

At that moment, surrounded by so many unhappy people, I felt a change. I felt myself turning into an adult, with responsibilities. Now is not the time of dolls and dreams.

Try as she did to resist the pain, it was clear that young Shorouq just wanted to say a last goodbye to her sister and play together one more time.

Her lack of closure has been explored in her therapy sessions. The therapist asks her to draw what she feels. Sometimes, an empty paper expresses everything she feels.

She told me:

I used to love playing with dolls with Shahed. After the massacre, I lost my interest in everything. I actually still have a small piece of my doll that I found under the rubble.

In her free time, when she is not in school, she feels the pressure, and the flashbacks come back. She tells me she is consumed with uncontrollable thoughts. Now she is enrolled in an additional school. The time spent studying is an attempt to escape from her memories.

The detachment may be helping. Recently, Shorouq told me:

I hung a drawing on the door in my room. It’s a drawing of a warm home with open windows. Each morning, I look at that because it looks like peace.

Areej Alghazzawi is a junior accountancy student at the Islamic University of Gaza. She hopes to become a teacher and an accountant. She had one year left of her studies before Israel’s attack put her hopes on hold.

Alghazzawi is currently displaced but still in Gaza and, along with her family members, struggling every day to survive.

Featured image via the Canary

The mainstream media are choosing to ignore blatant anti-semitism and Islamophobia from Rupert Lowe‘s new racist party, Restore Britain.

Hey I wonder if this party unambiguous believing that Jewish people can’t be British will receive much press attention. pic.twitter.com/j4dB7YuP2f

— linkshund (@linkshund) February 17, 2026

During an interview with Talk TV, Charlie Downes, campaigns director and spokesperson for Restore Britain, stated that Reform UK do not have a clear picture of who the British people are.

Then, in a follow-up post on X, Downes stated:

Restore Britain believe that Britain is a people defined by indigenous British ancestry and Christian faith.

Essentially, Restore Britain has shown itself to be anti-anything that isn’t white Christian.

You’ve never clearly explained what British is

You say ethnicity, then waver into some cultural ties, then go to the way of life, then dip into religion, and end up with Christianity

Excuse me, Celtic Britons were there before. How do you dismiss that blood line?#RestoreGate https://t.co/QawK1tbNXw

— JustCallMeMum 🎗️🩵 (@bigfanofmykids) February 17, 2026

Advertisement

I guess I should hand in my passport then, since I don’t own a Bible.

So less than half of white British are actually British because they’re not Christian. Good luck deporting 30 million Anglo Saxons, Charlie. pic.twitter.com/wh4b2kkgnx

— Donna Rachel 🕊️ (@Donna_Rachel_) February 16, 2026

But surely, anyone with “indigenous British ancestry and Christian faith” includes half of the US? Along with half of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada? Not to mention India, parts of the Caribbean, and all the other countries the British Empire spread the ‘civilising’ message of Christianity.

It also rules out the English:

That rules out the English, who were pagan boat migrants. pic.twitter.com/mwBaL3j84a

— Mongrel Noflags, the Irish fella (@Mongrelbite) December 23, 2025

Restore Britain and anti-semitism

At a time when the mainstream media likes to cry wolf and shout anti-semitism whenever anyone criticises Israel, it appears extremely lopsided that Restore can now spout this bullshit live on National TV and not be called out for it. He is literally saying Jewish people cannot be British:

So Jews can’t be British either? What about atheists? What about pagans or druids? They’ve been here longer than Christians?

— John McHugh – are ANTIFA in the room with you now? (@JohnMcHugh1878) February 17, 2026

Or is it only antisemitism if you’re left-wing?

Yeah see this is the kind of opinion that will be ignored entirely because it’s not coming from the left.

— linkshund (@linkshund) February 17, 2026

When asked on a separate X post, Charlie confirmed that he didn’t mean Judeo-Christian.

No. The concept of “Judeo-Christian values” is incoherent.https://t.co/GfwfRD59k8

— Charlie Downes (@cfdownes_) December 23, 2025

The UK’s billionaire-owned corporate media (along with our politicians!) has a long history of weaponising the accusation of antisemitism, especially in the context of taking down Jeremy Corbyn.

But now, Restore has made it clear that its idea of Britishness excludes Judeo-Christians. In other words, Charlie Downes is basically confirming the party’s anti-Jewish stance. Basically, far-right grifters like Rupert Lowe want the UK to be a white supremacist ethnostate.

The mainstream media should be calling out right-wingers when they show their utterly racist colours, instead of letting it go unchallenged.

Ultimately, anti-semitism is only news for the billionaire press when it’s in fact, not anti-semitism at all – but anti-Zionism challenging colonial power.

Featured image via Talk TV/X 

In their latest in a long string of U-turns, Labour have announced that local elections will now go ahead as normal in May 2026.

The ruling party had previously called to postpone elections in 30 locations across England. This was ostensibly intended to allow time and capacity for a sweeping restructure of local government.

However, the parliamentary Labour party (PLP) reversed its decision after learning that it would likely lose against Nigel Farage’s legal challenge to the delay.

Labour: ‘doubled-up bureaucracy’

The government originally laid out plans to restructure local authorities back in 2024. This included proposals to merge some district and county councils into a single unitary authority, and to combine some adjacent councils into one.

In 2025, nine local authorities successfully applied to postpone elections whilst they carried out the reconfiguration.

However, in December 2025, Labour wrote to councils asking if they wished to delay the 2026 elections. 30 local authorities accepted the offer. These included 21 Labour-led councils, five Conservatives, two Lib Dems, and one each Green and Independent.

In January, Reed told the Commons:

We must move at pace to remove the confusion and waste of doubled-up bureaucracy. I have asked councils to tell me where holding elections this year to positions that will rapidly be abolished would slow down making these vital reforms, which will benefit local people, and I have listened to what councils told me.

However, that ‘doubled-up bureaucracy’ is now precisely what’s facing local authorities. Only now, Labour have made themselves look spineless and anti-democratic into the bargain.

‘Punishment voting’

The high proportion of Labour councils among those that chose to delay led many commentators to accuse the PLP of desperately clinging on to power in the face of what could otherwise be a major string of losses for the party.

Following this, Nigel Farage brought a legal challenge against the delays, which would have been heard on 19 and 20 February. The Reform UK leader was expected to argue that the plans violated democratic rights.

Sources close to the government have stated that Reed was warned back in January that the postponements would be vulnerable to legal review. However, it’s only in the last few days that lawyers informed the local government minister that Labour would likely lose against Farage’s challenge.

Farage clearly believes that the local election U-turn has played right into Reform’s hands. On 16 February, he gloated:

You can look at Norfolk, Suffolk, East Sussex and West Sussex, and you can say, well, these are the Tory heartlands. But I think there’s going to be a degree of punishment voting going on when these elections happen. So I fancy our chances there.

Labour now also find themselves facing down a £100,000 legal bill from Reform, for their trouble. And, they’ve just made things much harder for local councils anyway. Local government minister Steve Reed has promised £63m to the affected councils to help with the unexpected administrative costs. Council leaders will now have to rehire polling station venues, and scrabble to find returning officers – or even candidates – at short notice.

The Local Government Information Unit stated that:

This most recent announcement means that 30 councils will now have to run elections within an even more constrained timetable. This risks the successful delivery of elections in all of these places, not to mention the additional strain it will needlessly add to the workloads of dedicated staff.

U-turn after U-turn

The reversal of the plans to delay the local elections also comes as a humiliating blow for the embattled Kier Starmer. The PMs list of high-publicity policy U-turns now includes Personal Independence Payment cuts, the Universal Credit health element, winter fuel payments, audit reform, and ground rent abolition.

Faced with a similar list of his pathetic flip-flopping from the BBC’s Jeremy Vine, Starmer said:

I am a pragmatist. I am a common-sense merchant.

Personally, we at the Canary think that ‘spineless charlatan unfit for office’ would be more accurate. But then, the Labour leader never has said anything that accurate, has he?

Featured image via the Canary

We hope you love the products we recommend! All of them were independently selected by our editors. Just so you know, HuffPost UK may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page if you decide to shop from them. Oh, and FYI – prices are accurate and items in stock as of time of publication.

Is some of the critique warranted? Yes, I think so. But when it comes to the wardrobe choices, to paraphrase the great Jemima Kirke: I think you guys might be thinking about historical accuracy too much.

Fennell isn’t the first person to take creative liberties with the garments in their films, and she certainly won’t be the last.

When a wardrobe is this beautiful, I simply haven’t got the heart to care about things like which types of fabric were invented when.

It’s like Kate Hawley, a costume designer who’s been nominated for an Oscar for her work on Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, told Dazed last year: “I like breaking the rules because it’s all about the story that we’re telling. We’re in a dream of the period, it’s its own world.”

If you’ve been inspired by Fennell’s dream of Wuthering Heights (or even just the press tour looks) here are some of the most wuthering-esque bits we could find on the high street right now.

A Swiss Olympics commentator has done what no British counterpart will do – challenge why genocidal Israel is allowed to compete.

Stefan Renna, who works for Swiss Radio and Television (RTS), pointed out that bobsled racer Adam Edelman calls himself “Zionist to the core“. Edelman has also made numerous social media posts supporting Israel’s Gaza genocide. Renna even used the g-word – genocide – that terrifies UK corporate ‘journalists’, referring to the findings of the UN International Commission of Inquiry, adding:

I am familiar with this terminology. Edelman described Israel’s military intervention as the most moral and just war in history.

Renna reminded viewers that Ukrainian skeleton athlete Vladyslav Heraskevych had been banned from wearing a helmet featuring photos of those who died in the war in his country. And he even dared to point out the hypocrisy of the Olympics committee banning Russians who supported that country’s war in Ukraine – yet welcoming openly genocidal Israelis:

Renna’s point was well made, legally watertight, and morally flawless. So of course he has been viciously targeted by the Israel lobby for his ‘rant’. Oh for a fraction of his backbone among the cowardly and hypocritical UK ‘mainstream’ media.

Featured image via the Canary

Portugal has established itself as a frontrunner in sustainable tourism, blending its rich cultural heritage with eco-friendly practices. Many travellers appreciate the abundance of holiday villas in Portugal that align seamlessly with these initiatives, highlighting a commitment that sets a benchmark for other nations.

In recent years, Portugal has become synonymous with sustainable tourism, drawing visitors who value environmental stewardship. Enjoying Portugal villa holidays provides a way to protect the countries landscapes by engaging with responsible travel across various sectors. These holidays have gained popularity among those seeking an eco-conscious getaway. As you explore this picturesque country, you’ll discover how its green initiatives are transforming the travel experience while safeguarding its cherished ecosystems. For travellers seeking a villa in Portugal that embraces sustainability, the options continue to grow.

Why Portugal is a top holiday destination

Portugal consistently ranks as a top holiday destination due to its favourable climate, stunning coastline, rich gastronomy, and reputation for safety. The Algarve and Lisbon Coast are particularly renowned for their breathtaking beaches and vibrant cultural scenes. Additionally, the Portuguese countryside offers tranquil retreats with picturesque landscapes, making it ideal for travellers seeking both relaxation and adventure.

These regions provide diverse experiences that cater to different preferences, from exploring historic cities to enjoying outdoor activities like hiking and surfing. Portugal’s commitment to preserving its natural beauty while offering modern amenities enhances its appeal to tourists worldwide. This balance of tradition and innovation ensures that visitors can enjoy a memorable holiday experience in this captivating country. Booking holiday rentals in Portugal has become a preferred choice for those who appreciate both privacy and the chance to experience the local culture authentically.

Beyond its natural attractions, Portugal boasts a welcoming atmosphere that makes visitors feel at home from the moment they arrive. The Portuguese people are known for their warm hospitality and genuine friendliness, creating an inviting environment for international travellers. The country’s excellent infrastructure, including well-maintained roads, reliable public transportation, and modern airports, ensures seamless travel throughout the region. With its affordable cost of living compared to other Western European destinations, Portugal offers exceptional value without sacrificing quality, making it accessible to travellers with varying budgets.

Many visitors also opt for a holiday villa in Portugal when seeking more authentic experiences in smaller towns. Whether exploring coastal hotspots or venturing inland, a Villa holiday in Portugal provides exclusive comfort and opportunities for cultural immersion.

The benefits of holiday villas over hotels

Choosing a holiday villa in Portugal offers numerous advantages over traditional hotel stays. Villas provide more space, privacy, and flexibility, making them perfect for families and groups. Guests can enjoy private pools, expansive outdoor areas, and fully equipped kitchens, allowing for personalised experiences tailored to their needs.

Holiday villas also offer greater value by accommodating larger groups at a lower cost per person compared to hotels. This option allows travellers to enjoy luxurious amenities and scenic locations without compromising on budget. By opting for a Villa holiday in Portugal, visitors can immerse themselves in the local culture while enjoying the comforts of home.

Booking through specialists versus large platforms

Booking a holiday villa through trusted villa rental specialists in Portugal offers distinct advantages over using large platforms. Specialists provide personalised service and expert knowledge of the local area, ensuring guests find the perfect accommodation for their needs. They often manage professionally maintained villas, guaranteeing high standards of cleanliness and comfort. For travellers who prefer holiday villas in Portugal, specialized booking services frequently deliver unmatched value and peace of mind.

These specialists also offer exclusive access to unique properties and insider tips on local attractions and activities. By choosing a specialist, travellers benefit from a tailored experience that enhances their holiday, providing peace of mind and ensuring a memorable stay. Whether you seek a villa in Portugal near the coast or a quiet countryside retreat, these experts can match you with the ideal accommodation. This approach contrasts with the often impersonal experience of booking through large platforms, where customer service and local insights may be limited.

Portugal’s global leadership in sustainable tourism

Portugal’s comprehensive approach to sustainable tourism positions it as a global leader in balancing visitor satisfaction with environmental preservation. By integrating government policies with community-led initiatives, the country has created a blueprint for responsible travel that other nations can emulate. The success of Portugal villa holidays serves as a testament to the effectiveness of these strategies in attracting tourists while safeguarding natural resources.

The ongoing commitment to sustainability ensures that a holiday villa in Portugal remains an attractive option for discerning travellers who prioritise eco-friendly practices. As nations worldwide grapple with the challenges of balancing economic growth with environmental protection, Portugal stands out as an inspiring example of how thoughtful policies and community engagement can lead to lasting positive change.

5 min read19 min

When I stood for Parliament in 1997 my Conservative Party opponent put out leaflets claiming local young people would be in danger if “bent Ben” won.

I had expected my opponents to exploit the fact I was gay. Homophobia was still rampant in much of the media. Chris Smith was the lone openly gay man in Parliament. Gay people were still subject to a raft of discriminatory laws. 

This was the era of “Section 28”, the law passed by the Thatcher Government in 1988 banning the “promotion of homosexuality’. It originated from a backlash against the growing visibility of gay and lesbian people that followed the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967. Stonewall was founded to campaign to repeal Section 28 and to pursue LGBT rights more generally.

I had been lucky to enjoy an easy coming out for someone of my generation when I was 18. My family and friends were supportive, and I was convinced the public was further ahead on LGBT rights than the media or the political parties. 

This seemed borne out when I won Exeter from the Conservatives with the biggest swing in southwest England and became the first person selected and elected to Parliament as openly gay. 

This was a hopeful time for LGBT people. The new Labour Government had a modest but encouraging set of proposals for reform, including the repeal of Section 28.

By the end of its time in office, it had scrapped Section 28, equalised the age of consent, ended the ban on gays in the military, approved gay adoption, banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, introduced Civil Partnerships and passed the Gender Recognition and Equality Acts. 

All these reforms were hard fought, and the Government had to resort to the rarely used Parliament Act to force the equal age of consent through the House of Lords. Stonewall’s pragmatic but principled campaigning was key to achieving all these reforms.

Prejudice did not disappear overnight. I struggled for some time to get a parliamentary “spouses pass” for my husband, so we could have the occasional dinner together during late night sittings. Colleagues received invitations to events for their wives and husbands, while the gay MPs didn’t, and when the MPs’ expenses scandal broke, a newspaper carried a full page of outrage at the fact that MPs in same sex partnerships were subject to the same rules as straight ones. 

But protection and equality under the law were preconditions for the rapid improvement in media and public attitudes. When I became the first Minister to have a civil partnership in 2006, there was hardly a ripple of hostility; instead, an outpouring of love and good wishes. 

When David Cameron took up the cause of LGBT equality and then legislated for Equal Marriage, it seemed progress was secure and a broad political consensus had been achieved. 

But, as we come together again to mark LGBT history month in 2026, it is clear that confidence was misplaced.

Hard-won rights are under threat of being rolled back and some already have been. The UK has fallen from the top position it enjoyed in the European LGBT Equality Index in 2015 years to 22nd today. Social media has often provided a platform for bigotry and abuse that we’d hoped had become a thing of the past. 

The ban against conversion practices has been promised for seven years, by four Prime Ministers but has yet to materialise. This Government has promised time and time again; it will be delivered by the end of this parliamentary session.

Hate crime affecting LGBT people is rising again and trans people are feeling particularly vulnerable after last year’s Supreme Court ruling and the uncertainly that continues in its wake, as we await the statutory guidance from an EHRC that has deeply damaged its relationship with the public.

Many of the current tropes peddled about trans people remind me of those spread about gay people in the 1980s. That they are a “threat” to women or young people, or that giving them same rights as everyone else, simply to be themselves, diminishes everyone else’s rights. 

The changes put forward this month by Government to change the law and put LGBTQ+ hate crime on an equal footing with racial and religious hate crime, although long overdue, is another step forward on the journey to equality that Stonewall has campaigned for relentlessly. An appropriate way to mark LGBT History month, it will be the first legislative change since Same Sex marriage was passed, and is another important step in the journey to LGBTQ+ equality.

Generations of queer people, like me, have benefitted from the work of Stonewall and other human rights and equality organisations. With our freedoms and protections under threat, it is now time to give something back. 

That is why I am delighted to have joined the Stonewall Board. The arguments we thought we had had, need making afresh and winning again. 

Stonewall’s task is to once again turn this tide of hate, defend our rights and secure those not yet won for the generations to come. 

Sir Ben Bradshaw is a former Labour Minister and current Stonewall Trustee