Prime Minister Keir Starmer told MPs on Wednesday “there is no justification for more violence and disorder” following riots in Southampton.

4 min read19 min

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has told MPs “there is no justification for more violence and disorder” following riots in Southampton and criticised Reform UK leader Nigel Farage’s calls for “pure cold rage” in response to the murder of Henry Nowak. 

Advertisement

Footage released this week by police showed 18-year-old student Nowak being handcuffed and arrested as he lay dying on the ground in Southampton in December, telling officers he was not able to breathe.

Nowak had been stabbed by 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa, who had falsely told officers at the scene that he himself had been a victim of a racist attack. On Monday, Digwa was sentenced to life in prison with a minimum term of 21 years. 

There was unrest in Southampton on Tuesday night following the publication of the footage showing Nowak’s arrest. At the time of writing, two people had been arrested for their role in the protests, which resulted in 11 officers being injured, according to Hampshire Police.

Advertisement

Speaking in Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) on Wednesday, Starmer said now is “time for serious work, not rage”, and described attacks on police officers in Hampshire last night as “disgraceful and completely unacceptable”.

He paid tribute to the “extraordinary dignity” shown by Nowak’s family, “after their son’s life was stolen in appalling circumstances”.

“He was clearly a kind, thoughtful, and much-loved young man. There are serious questions to answer, including how accusations of racism informed police thinking. And we’re supporting the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct) to get to the bottom of what happened,” he said.

Advertisement

The IOPC police watchdog has initiated an investigation into the conduct of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary, while at the same time, the Attorney General’s office is considering whether to review Digwa’s sentence.

Later in PMQs, Farage asked Starmer about “two-tier policing”.

“Following the horrendous circumstances of Henry Nowak’s death, can I urge the Prime Minister to consider this: it is now clear to growing millions in this country that we’re living under two-tier policing,” the Reform leader said.

“The instructions that are given to police officers from police bosses are clear and written down in ink: it says he must treat different ethnic groups in different ways.

Advertisement

“That apart from the upset and the anger at the circumstances of his death, the anger that you saw spilling out in Southampton last night, and which is in danger of getting considerably worse.”

Starmer said he doesn’t believe there is two-tier policing in the UK, then accused Farage of pretending to respect Nowak’s family.

“I’m really shocked that he pretends to have respect for Henry’s family, and then acts in this way.

“A grieving family have asked us not to respond in the way that the leader of Reform has responded: they’ve asked us not to, they have lost their son in the most appalling circumstances.

Advertisement

“They make a simple plea of us, as human beings, to please not exploit that. That is their plea to us, but we all need to reflect on those words of Henry’s father. My response, and the response of others… has been focused on the lessons to be learned, so we can deliver justice.

“His response has been to appeal for rage. Rage. That’s his response to a father who’s lost his son and asked for that not to happen. Exploiting this tragedy to create grievance and division would be wrong in any circumstances, but to do it when the family are expressly saying please don’t, is unforgivable.

“It shows exactly who he is.”

Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch struck a similar tone to the PM, telling MPs it was the “responsibility of everyone to bring people together, not divide them”. 

Advertisement

“I also want to share my deepest condolences to the family and friends of Henry Nowak,” said Badenoch. 

“The circumstances around Henry’s wrongful arrest and tragic murder must be a wake-up call to the entire country and to our institutions that every life matters. And that it is the responsibility of everyone in this house to bring people together, not divide them.”

 

Source link

Israel lobbyists — and UK politicians who take donations from Israel lobbyists — characterise protests against Israel’s genocide as ‘hate’. It’s a bare-faced lie. But the far-right is full of hate yet many MPs refuse to say so.

The ‘protest’ (riots) in Southampton on Tuesday, egged on by fascists Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson, put it beyond doubt.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by MEND Community (@mendcommunity)

Israel-aligned politicians attack humanitarians instead

Yet the Starmer regime is treating this real hate as a side issue. It’s too busy waging war on peaceful protest, free speech on genocide and the humanitarians who resist mass murder and war crimes.

The ‘mainstream’ media are no better. While peaceful marches are ‘hate’, fascist race-riots are both-sided and branded as “clashes with police”. Britain is being broken on purpose.

Featured image via Isabel Infantes/AFP 

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: 12 July 1936 – 28 May 2026 | Image courtesy of UK Parliament

4 min read5 min

Former spy and later a government minister and whip, Meta Ramsay was an exceptional person in so many ways. Loyal to her country, her party and her friends, she was a mentor to many of us. Words by Lord Foulkes

Advertisement

Meta Ramsay was an exceptional person in so many ways: a powerful woman in a man’s world, a most generous friend in every sense, and a mentor to many of us. She was loyal in every way: to her country, the Labour Party and, above all, to her friends.

Her background was relatively modest. Those who knew her mother, Sheila – the daughter of Jewish refugees from Ukraine – could see where Meta got her strength of character. Her father, Alexander, was a gentle man in every sense, but nevertheless an avid supporter of Glasgow Rangers. This likely explains why Meta, though not a football follower herself, would always know the Hearts result by the time we spoke on Sundays.

After happy years at her local Battlefield Primary School, her parents saved enough to send Meta to Hutchesons’, then a fee-paying corporation school, which enabled her to gain a place at the University of Glasgow. There, she joined a cohort of formidable debaters and politicians – including Donald Dewar, John Smith, Ming Campbell, and Douglas Alexander (father of the current secretary of state) – and was able not just to hold her own, but to better them.

Advertisement

At Scottish universities, the men’s and women’s unions were social and debating centres, but the students’ representative council (SRC) was the true hub of power. Meta became the first woman to serve as president of the Glasgow University SRC, a foretaste of things to come. Scotland also had its own national student body, the Scottish Union of Students, and, once again, Meta was the first woman to become its president. It was then that we met, when I attended their conferences as a representative from the Edinburgh SRC.

At the time, the Cold War was at its height, and the international student scene was divided between the Communist International Union of Students (IUS) headquartered in Prague and the International Student Conference (ISC) in Leiden. In a further portent of things to come, Meta moved to the ISC to serve as assistant secretary.

Meta’s service in MI6, the Secret Intelligence Service, was known to very few at the time, long before the organisation became as open as it is today. Her frontline work in Finland, and her role in the defection of Oleg Gordievsky in particular, is now the stuff of legend – and rightly so.

Advertisement

One disobliging colleague said to Labour leader John Smith, ‘Be careful, she was a spy,’ to which John retorted, ‘I know, that’s why I’m appointing her!’

Away from the intense world of intelligence, Meta maintained a warm and deeply grounded personal life. She was utterly devoted to her dear Cairn Terrier, Tam, so much so that she once prevailed upon me to chauffeur him from Glasgow to London! How could I refuse?

When she retired from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), she soon moved to work as foreign affairs adviser to the Labour leader, John Smith. One disobliging colleague said to John, “Be careful, she was a spy,” to which John retorted, “I know, that’s why I’m appointing her!”

Advertisement

She was appointed to the House of Lords by Tony Blair and became a whip, skilfully piloting the Scotland Bill through the Lords and keeping her flock in line. And when Labour moved into opposition, she served, fittingly, as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee and on the North Atlantic Assembly, Nato’s parliamentary body.

Her activity in the Labour Party spanned her entire adult life, bookending her foreign service, including joining the Scottish Executive Committee to provide vital senior female leadership during the period when Ian Murray was Labour’s sole Scottish MP.

She fell ill in London but returned home to Glasgow, where she passed away accompanied by her longstanding friend, assistant, and executor, the wonderful Caroline Thickett. She has since received glowing tributes from all sides of the House of Lords and beyond.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock is a Labour peer

Advertisement

Source link

Source link

Is Caribbean unity at a turning point? Since the brazen and horrific US attack on Venezuela in January, the Caribbean’s regional trade bloc CARICOM has been in crisis. What has been left out by much of the media is the assistance that some Caribbean countries like Trinidad and Tobago gave the United States in its imperialist attack on the South American country.

Trinidad and Tobago support of the US

The Dominican Republic and Guyana all played a role in providing the US with bases and logistical support. However, more than any other country, Trinidad and Tobago provided temporary radar surveillance and the airbase that the US could use to launch its criminal attack that killed at least 80 Venezuelans.

Since then, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar has defended the strikes and launched her own verbal attacks on CARICOM member states. She has even gone as far as to question CARICOM’s viability and failure to reflect the economic and geopolitical interests of Trinidad and Tobago.

These tensions have brought into sharp focus the growing challenges in working to bring about regional integration in the Caribbean.

Caribbean collaboration

The region has a long history of regional integration attempts going back almost 70 years with the most recent — the short-lived West Indies Federation — collapsing in 1962.

This latest division will likely test the resilience of CARICOM at a critical time when US imperialism is particularly volatile and a threat to the entire region. As small island states, Caribbean countries have managed to survive the post-independence period through regional cooperation and negotiating as a single bloc.

However, beneath this resilience hides an elite-driven, state-centric approach to development that reproduces economic dependency and creates the conditions for wealthier member states, like Trinidad and Tobago, to pursue unilateral agreements with larger powers.

T&T’s grievances are a decade in the making

To understand how we got here, we have to look at what is motivating the Trinidad and Tobago government to take the position it has against CARICOM.

For months, Persad-Bissessar has been questioning CARICOM’s effectiveness on maintaining regional security, challenging the idea of Trinidad and Tobago’s place within the bloc — especially as the country contributes up to 20% of CARICOM’s annual budget, which amounts to $20 million.

She has since demanded that CARICOM’s secretary general, Carla Barnett, step down once her five-year term ends later this year.

Persad-Bissessar has also repeatedly defended the US’ controversial actions in the lead up to its attack on Venezuela. Between September and December 2025, the US murdered 115 people in the Caribbean Sea on the unproven pretext of “drug smuggling”.

Since then, many fishermen across the region have been reluctant to go out to sea for fear of a US strike, which has had adverse effects on people’s livelihoods.

In September 2025, Roosevelt Skerrit, Prime Minister of Dominica, asserted that the Caribbean Sea should remain a “zone of peace” in response to the increased US military build up against Venezuela.

However, Persad-Bissessar also defended the US’ presence, stating:

CARICOM has chosen to support the Maduro narco-government through the fake zone of peace narrative.

Demographic shock

For Trinidad and Tobago, the position on the US strikes on Venezuela is different from other Caribbean countries. This is in part due to the proximity of the island nations, which is only 11-12km (7 miles) away from Venezuela, making the Caribbean country the closest to South America.

This is important because, for over a decade, migration from Venezuela to Trinidad has steadily increased, due in part to the economic mismanagement of the Maduro government, and the brutal and coercive US sanctions that were designed to cripple the Venezuelan economy. As a result, more than 30,000 Venezuelans have settled in Trinidad and Tobago, adding to the population of 1.5 million people in a short space of time.

This demographic shock has produced familiar anti-immigrant rhetoric around integration, crime, housing and competition for jobs that often emerge in migration discourse in the West. However, in Trinidad and Tobago, this migration wave has exacerbated existing issues, including public service provision for citizens and general unpreparedness for refugees outside of the Caribbean.

Persad-Bissessar’s frustrations stem from what she and other Trinidadian elites view as the disproportionate humanitarian focus that CARICOM has prioritised in relation to the Venezuelan migration.

For Trinidad and Tobago, the priority is to militarise its border as a measure against what it sees as the threat of drug trafficking. These priorities have found a perfect synergy with the US’ refocus on controlling the Caribbean on the dubious basis of security.

Whether Persad-Bissessar knows it or not, she is positioning her country as a key node of US imperialism in the Americas, which will continue to increase tension within CARICOM itself.

CARICOM and the global economy

It could be argued that the tensions between CARICOM and Trinidad and Tobago are structurally rooted in the roles that both polities play in the global economy.

For CARICOM, its state-centric and elite-driven structure means that a lot of its decision making is dominated by heads of government, senior technocrats and private sector lobbies.

It has been said that CARICOM is designed to manage capitalism in the Caribbean. Many critics, such as Jamaican economist Norman Girvan, have argued that such a structure ensures that narrow interests centred around attracting foreign investment, harmonising tax incentives for multinationals and maintaining a tourism-focused development model, deepens the Caribbean’s position at the periphery of the global economy.

To-date, regional integration through CARICOM has failed to include workers or unions in regional decision making, develop plans for regional public ownership in energy, transport and food systems — all of which could strengthen state and regional systems.

Defenders of CARICOM would argue that, as small island states, CARICOM was created to strengthen and amplify the diplomatic power of individual Caribbean countries through collective action. This allows them to better resist absorption into US foreign policy and economic interests.

CARICOM’s foreign policy machinery, the Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR), was designed specifically for this. It creates coordinated foreign policy positions for CARICOM member states to act as a collective in drafting and creating treaties and trade agreements outside of the US sphere. The aim being to reduce dependence on the United States.

The consequences of foreign dependence

For Garvin and earlier thinkers (prior to CARICOM’s inception) like Walter Rodney, the issue is that Caribbean elites reproduce and maintain Caribbean dependency on foreign investment, remittances, extractive industries and trade with global powers like the US and European Union (EU). This is because they benefit directly from those structures in terms of having access to those markets. They are more inclined to compromise on policy in order to enjoy the benefits that they as a class could access from the developed world.

As a result, we have a region with a weak industrial policy, limited economic diversification and low wages.

It is a region also beholden to EU development funds, IMF frameworks and WTO rules. Even if CARICOM resists US imperialism in a limited context, the elite structure ensures that this resistance will never go far enough in creating full economic and political self-determination.

The bloc’s limitations in assisting Cuba as it faces economic strangulation by the US is an example of this. This weakness cascades into its relationship with wealthier members like Trinidad and Tobago, which clashes with CARICOM regionalism when it starts to obstruct its own attempt to align with global capital.

There is a perception among wealthier Caribbean countries that CARICOM holds them back from acting with full autonomy. Trinidad and Tobago policymakers increasingly question why they must go through their lower-income CARICOM counterparts to craft foreign policy given the country is significantly more industrialised than its neighbours.

As such, Trinidad’s own elites seek to assert their country’s ability to form independent agreements with the US and dictate their own migration policy. Trinidad and Tobago’s elites do not feel as dependent on regional integration as less developed Caribbean countries. Meanwhile, CARICOM does not have any real mechanism to enforce regional integration and cooperation of member states.

Is CARICOM at risk of collapse?

The unilateral foreign policy positions taken by Trinidad and Tobago are concerning for the long term viability of the bloc.

Last year, as US military build-up was increasing, Trinidad’s foreign affairs minister stated there was “no need to consult CARICOM”. Her comments indicate that at least in this moment, Trinidad and Tobago’s government is prepared to move the country away from multilateralism.

The effect is that distrust and suspicion have increased among other CARICOM member states towards Trinidad which could have an effect on regional cooperation in other areas.

However, Trinidad and Tobago is one of the biggest beneficiaries of CARICOM, accounting for a significant share of Trinidadan manufactured goods, energy products and financial services.

If Trinidad and Tobago was to leave CARICOM, it could incur trade losses of up to $3 billion. As such, a sudden Brexit-style departure would be unlikely, even with the current tensions.

The effects of CARICOM hostilities

Nonetheless, a departure is not impossible, but Trinidad and Tobago’s issues, if left unresolved, could weaken CARICOM in the long term.

Trinidad and Tobago doe not have to formally leave CARICOM to undermine the bloc and its neighbours. It could simply reduce or cease engagement altogether over time if the government determines the bloc is unable to serve its interests.

As CARICOM lacks the regional mechanisms to enforce unity, there is space for Trinidad and Tobago to undertake this. However, Trinidad and Tobago’s lack of engagement would weaken CARICOM.

This is the threat that Trinidad and Tobago’s position poses, and it has already started.

The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, urged governments across CARICOM to negotiate as a single bloc since historically, the US has taken Caribbean states and interests more seriously when they negotiate together. The actions of Trinidad and Tobago sets a greater precedent for the US to expect bilateral negotiations going forward for other Caribbean countries.

Regional shifts

These changes are not without their consequences. Venezuela, in response to Trinidad and Tobago’s US assistance, has cancelled a number of key oil and gas deals. Relations with the two countries have remained cold, even with Venezuela’s new President, Delcy Rodriguez.

Rodriguez, on her first foreign visit in April, skipped past Trinidad and Tobago and went to Grenada and then to Barbados to discuss partnerships on a range of issues, such as food and energy security. Unlike Trinidad, both Caribbean countries resisted US pressure to install a radar system and to allow their territories to serve as launch points for an attack on Venezuela.

This signals another trend going forward: if CARICOM continues to pull away from each other, many other countries will see the opportunity to form partnerships with individual states rather than the collective bloc. In the short to medium term, this could seem like an opportunity. But over time, as small island states, this builds dependency and locks the region into internal competition with each other.

For regional integration to work, the Caribbean must rethink how CARICOM functions. It faces too many internal contradictions that will undermine it. This is the challenge facing the Caribbean: how can it create and maintain regional integration that accommodates all the economies in the region?

An alternative to CARICOM?

Perhaps a completely different model is needed to resolve the tension between national and regional interests with a goal of liberating the Caribbean from the divergent and competing capitalist priorities that CARICOM operates under.

The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) demonstrated the possibility in 2004. Both Cuba and Venezuela founded ALBA to challenge neoliberal blocs like CARICOM, and the US-led Free Trade Area of the Americas. They did this by implementing a different economic model of regional integration that does not foment competition amongst its members.

ALBA prioritised solidarity through shared development plans, joint public enterprises, mutual aid during crises and energy integration through barter arrangements as opposed to market determinants. It was deliberately post-capitalist by design and sought to empower Caribbean countries to delink from US-led capitalism.

Countries like Grenada, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dominica and Antigua and Barbuda joined ALBA at the time, benefiting from Cuban doctors and engineer exchange, as well as public ownership in the development of regional institutions like the development bank.

But ALBA would go into decline in 2014, due to Venezuela’s economic crisis and the devastating US sanctions imposed.

However, it represents the most recent attempt at creating a regional integration alternative in the Caribbean that resolves the internal contradictions of regional integration in its current form. It shows that such alternative models of regional integration are possible.

What does the Caribbean need now?

If models that prioritise public ownership over elite control are implemented, then the tensions between regional integration and national self determination that define the conflict between Trinidad and Tobago and CARICOM can be mitigated. And in time, completely dissolved.

Solving the conflict is essential for the Caribbean not only to meet the challenges presented by US imperialism but on other issues, such as the climate crisis and growing food and energy security.

Featured image via Roberto Schmidt/ Getty Images

By Lyndon Mukasa

Source link

The seat-warmer-in-chief squirms…

Source link

British Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC), Karim Khan, sat down with Analyst News to discuss the punitive state actions levelled towards him by Russian leader Vladimir Putin and US President Trump.

Khan opened up about the coercive agenda at play to intimidate him as he pursues justice and accountability for the tens of thousands of victims of flagrant war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In response, Khan defiantly centered those who have lost everything as a result of imperialist aggression, saying:

.. it’s not about us. It’s about victims and their right to justice.

They’re not worthless. They’re not numbers. They’re not abstract concepts.

Advertisement

They’re people that have lost their babies, their wives, their husbands, their grandparents.

'It's painful, it's difficult, it's meant to coerce … but it's not about us, it's about the victims' right to justice.'

In an exclusive interview with Analyst News, the International Criminal Court's Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan details the threats and sanctions against him,… pic.twitter.com/afFHn4E5qq

— Analyst News (@AnalystNews_) June 2, 2026

Advertisement

ICC prosecutor: ‘you go against Israel, we’ll come after you and your family’

ICC prosecutor Khan has faced no end of abuse from corrupted officials as a result of his determination to uphold the rule of international law. The decision to issue arrest warrants for political leaders involved in numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity no doubt fuels the ongoing sanctions

Moreover, the US has expanded its punitive and intimidating sanctions beyond Khan himself and extended them to his wider family, revoking his children’s US visas. All the while, there has been no meaningful condemnation from its allies. In fact, David Cameron joined these corrosive efforts, threatening Khan that the UK would withdraw from the ICC itself if warrants against Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant were not withdrawn.

Despite these silencing efforts to obstruct accountability for the genocide in Gaza, which the US and the UK have materially supported through the provision of bombs, bullets and the UK’s spy planes, Khan has remained inspiringly defiant.

As Chief Prosecutor, he makes clear that he will continue to pursue justice and uphold the independence of the court in the face of significant political pressure.

In the interview, he spoke about the threats and warnings he has received from US officials:

Karim Khan: You go against Israel, we’ll come after you and your family. You have been warned. Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, I mean, quite powerful individuals, wrote a public letter. They wrote to me and they said, you have been warned. That’s how it ended. You have been warned. Yes, we have faced threats. I’ve been convicted by the Russian Federation to a 15-year sentence for the audacity they think of applying for warrants that judges independently gave in relation to the aggression against Ukraine. And President Trump has sanctioned me and my family because of Palestine.

Analyst News Journalist: You had your email disabled, your bank account’s frozen. Is that still the case?

Khan: Yes, I don’t have any credit card in the world. I mean, all those types of things. You know, travel bans, my children’s visas, revoked to the United States.

Advertisement

The journalist then highlighted how Khan’s family are not prosecutors or involved in decision making yet have equally faced this abuse of power.

Well, this is the question. I mean, even Magnitsky sanctions for human rights violations don’t apply to family. But as the senator said, you know… They would come after me and my family. They’ve done that.

The Magnitsky sanctions mentioned by Khan refer to a bipartisan US federal law enacted in 2012, which:

allow the United States to freeze assets and ban travel for foreign individuals and entities involved in serious human rights abuses or significant corruption, regardless of their nationality.

 Khan: “It’s meant to coerce. It’s meant to make us change course.”

We have all witnessed countless severe abuses of the human rights of Palestinians and Iranians. But the US and its allies appear prepared to inflict this kind of punishment on anyone who challenges their sick agenda or seeks to hold Israel accountable.

Activists aboard the latest aid flotilla travelled towards Gaza in an attempt to deliver humanitarian assistance and show solidarity with Palestinians. Before long, Israeli forces once again intercepted the flotilla and detained those on board, an action many have condemned as illegal under international law. Subsequently, several activists reported that Israeli occupation forces subjected them to violent assault, rape, and multiple methods of torture.

Nevertheless, despite a depressingly huge volume of mounting evidence, the US has not applied Magnitsky sanctions against any Israeli officials.

Instead, they have chosen to weaponise those measures against a respected international lawyer for pursuing accountability under international law – and have even targeted his children in the process.

The Chief Prosecutor isn’t having any of it through and makes it clear that he will continue to fight for the people who have paid the price of Western imperialist aggression and Zionist settler colonialism:

But again, this is painful. It’s difficult. It’s meant to coerce. It’s meant to make us change course.

We can’t. And I think that’s a testament to the many women of the office that it’s not about us. It’s about victims and their right to justice.

Advertisement

Khan: ‘what’s liberating is accepting mortality’

This interview will undoubtedly reinvigorate advocates across the world. After all, millions of people have been calling out Israel and its crimes since the Israeli genocide escalated against Palestinian men, women and children after October 7th.

Whether it be the IOF leaving babies to starve to death in neonatal units, the bombing of hospitals and schools, or the kidnapping of thousands of Palestinians without charge or conviction, Israel’s crimes are far-reaching, morally depraved, and prolific.

When asked about whether he has feared for his own life and those of his family due to his principled professional stance, Khan powerfully stated:

What’s liberating is accepting mortality. You know, the cause of death is life.

So, once you accept that, actually these things don’t become very important.

Advertisement

Featured image via Getty/Michael M. Santiago

By Maddison Wheeldon

Source link

Richard Venga, Strategy Director, Commercial Products
| Mitsubishi Electric

Advertisement

As the UK government continues to pursue economic growth in the midst of a global energy crisis, could the decarbonisation of commercial buildings be a part of the solution to tackling both – reducing energy costs and supporting business to grow?

The Warm Homes Plan and the Future Homes and Buildings Standards set out clear objectives for decarbonising homes. Likewise, the Energy Security Bill, announced last month in the King’s Speech, will help to bring down energy costs in the long term.

But there are approximately two million non-domestic buildings in the UK. We now need a plan to retrofit these properties, which have so far been overlooked. Any plan should include a time-bound target for when existing fossil fuel systems must be replaced with a low-carbon system. While new non-domestic buildings will need to electrify under the Future Buildings Standards, ensuring existing buildings adopt low-carbon technologies is critical to the UK’s decarbonisation efforts.

Advertisement

The environmental benefits are clear, but a plan would also bring three key economic benefits:

• helping businesses to navigate volatile fossil fuel prices and plan for the transition
• addressing regional disparities
• strengthening the UK’s clean heat industry

Here’s how a plan for the decarbonisation of commercial buildings can drive energy security and economic growth:

1. Protecting business owners from fossil fuel volatility

The conflict in Iran and the ensuing energy shock have led to volatile gas prices, putting enormous pressure on businesses across the UK. Already stretched, many businesses are having to make difficult decisions on investment and jobs.

Currently, take-up of technologies such as heat pumps, solar panels and batteries among businesses lags behind the domestic sector. We need to see incentives for commercial building retrofit to help address this gap and provide businesses and landlords with the direction to invest.

Advertisement

By adopting these technologies, businesses will benefit from more efficient, modern heating. This will also shield businesses against price shocks in the future.

While there will be upfront costs for business and the government, the investment will prove extremely valuable in the event of any further energy price shocks and create a more secure economy.

2. Addressing regional disparities in the energy efficiency of commercial buildings

Large businesses, which are often based in major cities, are more likely to require high sustainability standards for their buildings, particularly as tenants increasingly seek buildings that meet higher sustainability standards as part of their own environmental commitments. This creates impetus for landlords to ensure their buildings meet these standards. As a result, we have seen successful retrofitting in business hubs – such as the Exchange Quay office campus in Manchester.

However, outside of major cities and existing business hubs, the demand for this technology is lower. This creates a vicious cycle, where businesses increasingly look to base themselves in cities with more modernised commercial buildings, and landlords focus their investments on these same places.

Advertisement

Regional disparities will continue to be reinforced unless the government acts. In addition to investment in retrofit, we also need clarity on timelines and a commitment to increasing minimum energy efficiency standards. Raising requirements for non-domestic buildings will raise the floor for commercial buildings and help improve supply across the UK.

3. Bolstering the UK’s clean heating sector

A stronger commitment to clean heating for commercial buildings will strengthen this growing sector of the green economy.

A key barrier to expanding the rollout of clean heating is having the right workforce to deliver it. However, 24 per cent of UK contractors say that there is not enough demand for heat pumps to justify training for installation.

A plan for the decarbonisation of commercial buildings would help create this demand and give workers the confidence to invest in skills.

Advertisement

More demand for clean technology also means more opportunity for manufacturers, increasing UK production, creating jobs and opening up new export opportunities – supporting the government’s ambitions for economic and industrial growth.

The logical next step for clean heating

The first few months of this year have seen significant progress on the government’s plans for decarbonising homes and promoting the adoption of clean heating.

The government has made it clear that the UK cannot rely on fossil fuels forever and has made vital steps to address this in the King’s Speech.

The next logical step is investment in clean heating for commercial buildings, which will give stability to business owners, raise standards across the UK, and help grow the green economy.

Advertisement

Now is the time to push forward and put forward a plan that gives equal backing, both in regulation and incentives, for non-domestic buildings.

Advertisement

Source link

On 1 June, the UK banned two prominent American leftists from entering the UK. The men in question were Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur, who are both Turkish Muslims. In response to this, the Labour Muslim Network has now spoken out.

Labour Muslim Network alarmed

The response from the network reads:

The Home Office’s decision to cancel the visas of Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker, preventing them from speaking at events in the UK, is alarming.

Given the significant public interest surrounding this case, the Government should provide a clear explanation of the basis on which this decision was made and the factors that led to the cancellation of their travel permissions.

Support for Palestinian rights, criticism of the actions of the Israeli government, and advocacy for international law and human rights must never be grounds for exclusion from public debate in the United Kingdom.

Advertisement

Muslim communities, and all those who speak out on matters of human rights and international justice, must have confidence that decisions of this nature are applied fairly, consistently and transparently.

Piker and Uygur have both attributed the ban to their criticism of Israel:

the uk has revoked my visa as well. all at the behest of israel. the west is betraying "liberal values" for a genocidal fascist foreign government. soon we will all become israel. https://t.co/UqQG1dogOI

— hasanabi (@hasanthehun) May 31, 2026

Advertisement

Featured image via Kris Connor (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Reform UK MP Robert Jenrick is spreading blatant misinformation in relation to the Henry Nowak case. And despite legal experts and social media users highlighting his lies, the post remains up:

Henry Nowak’s murderer will be out of prison in just over 20 years.

Why did he not get longer? Because the judge ruled that – as a Sikh – he had a “good legal reason” to carry a 21cm “Shastar” knife on the streets of Southampton.

This sentence is a joke. Two-tier justice… pic.twitter.com/LtBkIyStYF

Advertisement

— Robert Jenrick (@RobertJenrick) June 1, 2026

Oh, and to make matters worse, this guy used to be a solicitor. In other words, he should and does know better.

Reform lies

Former chief prosecutor Nazir Afzal is among those who criticised Jenrick, noting:

NO he won’t be “out in just over 20 years” – that’s the minimum term before he can apply for parole

N0 he didn’t get a lighter sentence because of the knife – he has deliberately cut out the bit that says he got a LONGER sentence

If he was still a solicitor he’d get struck off.

In recent days, a lot has been said about Sikhs’ right to carry ceremonial knives, known as ‘kirpans’. People are arguing Sikh people should not be permitted to carry these kirpans, but it’s not relevant in this case anyway, because the blade wasn’t a legally permitted kirpan. A kirpan must be blunt and a mere 8cm long; as Jenrick himself notes, this description does not match the murder weapon:

You’re a liar. The judge ruled the Sikh exemption did not apply to the 21cm murder weapon, it was not a kirpan and convicted him of unlawful possession. https://t.co/mF1khIqw4A

— Gilly (@GillysGuidance) June 2, 2026

CrimeLine – a “digital knowledge platform for criminal law” – quoted Jenrick’s words back at him:

“I will not let this lie”. Peak irony.

They added:

Cut and paste politics from another liar who also does know better but prefers hate and division.

This is possibly in reference to the fact that Reform is misquoting Kemi Badenoch for political clout:

Reform really are descending into the gutter now. This is a total distortion of what Kemi Badenoch actually said. It’s another example of their increasingly desperate efforts to neutralise Restore. https://t.co/RhXngXMXzc

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 2, 2026

Grim

Reform is pushing out these distortions despite the father of victim Henry Nowak saying:

We do not want his death to be used to create further division, hatred or tension.

Ignoring these words completely, Nigel Farage said:

Henry Nowak’s family have responded to his murder with dignity.

I suggest the rest of us respond with pure cold hard rage.

He said “cold, hard rage”, but he could have said “cold, hard lies”, because that’s what Reform is pumping out. And it’s doing so to ensure scenes like those we saw last night in Southampton:

Dozens of bricks being thrown pic.twitter.com/VwPXkfZlmR

— Taj Ali (@Taj_Ali1) June 2, 2026

Politicians like Robert Jenrick know precisely what they’re doing when they post these lies. And it’s a terrifying sign of the chaos Britain will descend into should these self-serving liars form a government.

Featured image via Leon Neal (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link