Politics
Ministerial aides quit as calls for Starmer to resign grow
Keir Starmer has suffered his first resignations as the calls for him to step down as prime minister grow.
Tom Rutland, a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, was the first to issue a statement announcing his decision to resign. A PPS acts as an unpaid parliamentary assistant, providing a link between the senior frontbencher and backbench MPs. The role is widely regarded as the first step on the ministerial ladder.
Rutland said that the prime minister “has lost authority not just within the parliamentary Labour Party but across the country and that he will not be able to regain it.”
He added: “That significantly impedes the ability of the government to deliver the change that people voted for at the general election – change that we must deliver…
MDU warns Chancellor clinical negligence system ‘not fit for purpose’
Northern Ireland RE curriculum is ‘indoctrination’ – Supreme Court
“I do not have faith that the prime minister can meet this challenge. It is not compatible to hold this view and continue to serve on the frontbench, so I have resigned as a parliamentary private secretary to the secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, and will continue to represent my wonderful constituents in East Worthing and Shoreham from the backbenches.”
Naushabah Khan subsequently resigned as a PPS in the Cabinet Office.
In a statement, Khan said: “I did not enter politics to stand by while we fail. We need a clear change of direction now and no game playing. A Labour government can and will rise to meet the moment if we act now.
“I am calling for new leadership, so that we can rebuild trust and deliver the better
future that the British people voted for.”
Sally Jameson, a PPS in the Home Office, has also called for Starmer to resign.
Jameson called for the prime minister to “set out a clear timetable for his departure in September or shortly after. In addition the NEC [national executive committee] should ensure that all potential candidates have the opportunity to stand and any timetable, I hope, would reflect this.”
In addition, Joe Morris, a PPS in the Department of Health and Social Care, has reportedly called for Starmer to step down.
Morris and Jameson did not initially state that they had resigned their roles. However, the government moved quickly to announce their replacements on Monday evening.
David Burton-Sampson was appointed as a PPS in the Department of Health and Social Care, while Linsey Farnsworth took up a PPS role at the Ministry of Justice.
Jayne Kirkham was appointed to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Michael Payne to the Home Office, Tim Roca to the Department for Work and Pensions and Sean Woodcock to the Cabinet Office.
Morris’ resignation was seen as especially significant. He is considered to be an ally of the health secretary, Wes Streeting, a likely leadership challenger. Another Streeting confidante, Jas Athwal – whose Ilford South constituency neighbours Streeting’s Ilford North seat – called for Starmer to resign on Monday afternoon.
Athwal called for Starmer to resign in a “smooth, dignified and orderly way so the party can choose new leadership and get back to the work people elected us to do.”
Collectively, Rutland, Jameson, Khan and Morris were the first frontbenchers to call on Starmer to step down as prime minister, after a day in which the number of backbench MPs calling for change at the top has snowballed.
Politics
The House | Rishi Sunak On AI: I Wish I’d Spoken To The Country More About The Change Coming
Photography by David Sandison
10 min read
Britain is well-positioned to benefit from the AI revolution, but its workforce may be more exposed than many others. Rishi Sunak tells Francis Elliott how he wishes he had done more to help voters prepare for what is about to come
Rishi Sunak has more time on his hands these days. Not just because he is out of No 10 but also because he is recuperating from a skiing accident caused by ‘showing off’ to his daughters.
In between the pain relief (“a lot of tramadol”) and the physiotherapy, the former prime minister has been building his own AI tool. In will go 20 episodes of his favourite podcasts and post-broadcast social media commentary on them, out will come a short precis that keeps the Richmond MP bang up to date on the issue about which he most cares.
He’s understandably quite chuffed with his new tool, having learned how to build it from a series of free online courses designed to improve AI skills.
“I’m about to turn [this] into something where, instead of having hundreds of pages of transcript, I would just get the three-, four-page, weapons-grade stuff that I need done, completely automatically, every single week.”
This may be peak geek chic, but it is also Sunak practising what he preaches: if you don’t want AI to consume you, you better start consuming AI. The 46-year-old may not have had a mandate or much of a majority as prime minister but, in starting to prepare the UK for the AI revolution, he has emerged with something of a legacy.
Advisory jobs at Anthropic and Microsoft keep him on the frontline of the policy implications of what tech leaders and politicians delicately call “the challenges of the transition” but the rest of us fear is massive, potentially destructive disruption.
Until relatively recently, the consensus had held that AI, like every other so-called general-purpose technology, would in short order create more jobs than it automated. Just as in the 17th century, nobody could conceive of the job as an electrician, so we today cannot comprehend the jobs AI will create.
But Sunak is one of those, like Anthropic boss Dario Amodei, who is – in terms of labour market disruption – starting to shift to a rather less rosy position: that this time it might be different.
“It’s both the breadth and the pace. If you compare in the past, and a nice way to measure it is, how long did it take a technology to get to, say, 100 million users? For electricity, it took about 70 years. Telephone, 50 years. PC, 15. Internet, seven years.
“It took ChatGPT two months. That gives you a sense of how quickly this is [taking place]. Why does that matter? Because history would tell you, these things over time have always worked out, and that new jobs have been created.
“Now, where that might break down is if the disruption is happening so quickly before you get all the new jobs being created. If it just happens so fast, you will get more concentration of job losses first before the new jobs come along.
“The second [factor] is because it is so broad. In the past… general-purpose technologies… would displace employment from a particular area, but there were multiple other opportunities that that person would be able to find work in, that were not disrupted by the same technology.”
He says “this time it’s different” are among the most dangerous words in the English language, but it’s not an implausible outcome. “And certainly not so implausible that a leader should just assume the best.”
Which takes us to Keir Starmer. Sunak gives the Starmer government credit for taking forward the agenda. He recently appeared with David Lammy selling Britain to an audience of AI leaders gathered in Delhi and has met with both Peter Kyle and his successor as tech secretary, Liz Kendall. He says they are broadly doing the right things.
But he clearly thinks Starmer hasn’t the bandwidth or the capacity to make preparing the country for what is to come an absolute priority, and admits he wished he had done more while he was in No 10.
“I wish I had done more on it, and that I’d spoken to the country more about the change that is coming and what it means for us, and how we can make sure it works for the country, how it works for families, how it works for our public services, how it’s going to be good. But also to give people the reassurance that they need, because there’s a lot of anxiety out there about what it means to them.
“You can only have, as prime minister, a handful of personal priorities that you are going to drive through the system that emanate from your office in Downing Street, that the entire system and the entire country knows are your priorities. That is the only real way to change something of this magnitude. This [issue of AI] is, and should be, for the country’s sake, one of those three things.”
Starmer is possessed of a rather different priority at the moment, as Sunak acknowledges.
“The problem with all the drama that we’ve seen in the last week, when these things happen, governments stop governing, essentially, and they start focusing on survival.”
Domestic squalls will pass; the question of how the UK copes with geopolitical and technological dislocations will sustain.
“If you look at the two things that have just changed, we as a country need to make sure that we are prepared for them. It’s a geopolitical environment that has changed, and the fact that we’re on the cusp of this enormous, significant technological revolution, are the two most dominant structural forces out there.”
Does Sunak agree with Nick Clegg, another who found a berth on the US west coast after government, that talk of UK AI sovereignty is “dishonest”? In as far as sovereignty means the UK being entirely independent, Sunak agrees that this is a fiction.
The US and China will continue to exert huge leverage over other nations because of their dominance over the emerging technology. But Sunak says the UK has cards to play and that it needs only to make itself “indispensable” in part of the supply chain to protect itself.
As a Conservative, Sunak is suspicious of the ‘picking winners’ element of the government’s new AI Sovereign fund, but sees the value in putting resources – not just cash but computing power – behind potential capabilities that might, in time, serve as vital national assets.
New hardware innovations – chip-making – are among the start-ups that have been given taxpayers’ cash. Other assets include the AI Safety Institute which seems well-positioned to serve as the world’s premier kitemarking service for Big Tech to show consumers their products won’t do serious damage. (Anthropic recently submitted its new Mythos tool to the ASI for evaluation.)
I wish I had done more on it, and that I’d spoken to the country more about the change that is coming
UK biotech and access to NHS data also mean the country is well-placed to make the most of a coming explosion of new drugs and treatments powered by AI.
These are, Sunak agrees, “reasons to be cheerful”. Even better, he says, is another lesson from the other times the world has been transformed by new technology.
“History tells you that you don’t need to be the place that invents the technology to be the place that benefits the most from it,” starts an enthusiastic Sunak. “I geek out about this all the time.
“The printing press is my favourite example. That’s invented in Germany, in Mainz, the Dutch were the ones that run away with it. But you look at why it’s fascinating, it’s because of a couple of reasons.
“One is they didn’t have censorship laws. So, obviously, if you’re a printing business, you’ve got to have these very stifling laws in Germany, what you could and couldn’t say in print. They didn’t have that in the Netherlands – free for all.
“The second thing is, they didn’t have guilds like the Germans. These old-school trade union closed shop decided [who could and could not operate a press]. And then the third thing is, because there were more advanced financial markets in Amsterdam, the companies could hedge paper costs, right? Which really matter, because they were volatile.
“So, that’s why the Dutch became [the world’s] publisher, right? So, you don’t need to be Beijing, you don’t need to be Silicon Valley. This technology exists. It’s out there. We should be trying to win the race for what I call everyday AI.”
It’s a full-fat free market interpretation from a man who is, after all, paid to keep the regulators at bay. But he is not as aggressive as some Tories on the threat to AI from any EU reset, noting that the Commission itself is trying to unwind some of its early attempts to bring US tech giants to heel and that Starmer has largely followed his own hands-off approach.
Nor is he particularly exercised about the relatively high energy costs making Britain a less attractive place to build data centres – a huge number of which will be needed to power the AI revolution. He does, however, say the government ought not to be “ideological” about letting data centres source their energy from fossil fuel sources.
He sees both sides of the debate about whether to ban under-16s from social media, noting the design challenges of that policy but also its utility in making it easier for parents to set rules.
When these things happen, governments stop governing essentially and they start focusing on survival
Despite the noise around social media, so far the so-called ‘techlash’ in the UK has been muted compared to that which is starting to shape US politics. There is no high-profile equivalent of Bernie Sanders, the Democrat senator leading the campaign against data centres, or Steve Bannon attacking AI from the populist right.
But the fact is that the UK’s economy is dominated by just those sectors that appear to be most vulnerable to labour market disruption.
That AI models can already reliably replicate many, if not most, of the tasks carried out by many so-called knowledge workers has huge potential implications for this country. The upside is an economy that receives an outsize productivity boost – the downside is a white-collar bloodbath so bad it potentially shatters the social contract.
Some AI insiders apparently have started to become profoundly worried about the societal implications of a technology that could turbocharge existing inequalities, concentrating ever more wealth in the hands of a tiny number, while also creating a “permanent underclass”.
Sunak wants political leaders in the West to move fast to reassure voters that they will be helped through the transition. The UK particularly cannot afford to miss out on a change that could at last lift it out of its decline.
There is still plenty of time to ensure that AI augments and does not just automate. Governments can rebalance the tax system to favour labour, he says. Workers, meanwhile, have time to learn the AI skills that will make them more attractive to employers.
“The biggest risk in all of this is if you just put your head in the sand and try to ignore it. The bigger risk is we will get left behind and become less competitive and efficient than other countries,” Sunak warns.
“We happen to have more knowledge workers [than] other countries. I think the bigger risk is we don’t embrace this wholeheartedly and as quickly as others…
“There is currently, in the West, a trust deficit when it comes to AI, for sure. In contrast to places like India, China, the Gulf, Singapore, where positivity and trust around AI is very high, in Western countries here – the US in particular – it’s very low.
“And we do need to change that because if that persists, all these wonderful benefits I think this technology can provide will never get realised because it will either be regulated or banned or just not adopted.
“We have to create an environment where people feel more positive about the technology in order for us as a society to actually get the benefits.”
Keir Starmer is in “listening” mode, a senior cabinet ally has suggested as the prime minister faces a chorus of calls to resign.
Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister, insisted that Starmer is “getting on with the job” but appeared to confirm that he is now considering his political future.
Jones recognised that Labour MPs were “asking the prime minister to consider different options in the future”.
Speaking to Sky News, Jones added: “He rightfully is listening to them. It would be wrong if he wasn’t listening to them.”
MDU warns Chancellor clinical negligence system ‘not fit for purpose’
Northern Ireland RE curriculum is ‘indoctrination’ – Supreme Court
These remarks from a senior minister follow reports that his cabinet colleagues are split on Starmer’s future. According to reports overnight, Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, has called on Starmer to set out a timetable to step down ahead of a crunch cabinet meeting on Tuesday morning.
The prime minster faced a series of resignations on Monday evening as calls for him to quit grew over the course of the day. Monday began with a make-or-break speech from the prime minister in which he vowed to defy his “doubters”. But the address failed to quell the burgeoning rebellion on Labour’s backbenches.
The resignations of Tom Rutland, Naushabah Khan, Sally Jameson and Joe Morris threw Starmer’s premiership into graver peril.
Rutland, a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, was the first to issue a statement announcing his decision to resign. A PPS acts as an unpaid parliamentary assistant, providing a link between the senior frontbencher and backbench MPs. The role is widely regarded as the first step on the ministerial ladder.
Rutland said that the prime minister “has lost authority not just within the parliamentary Labour Party but across the country and that he will not be able to regain it.”
He added: “That significantly impedes the ability of the government to deliver the change that people voted for at the general election – change that we must deliver.”
Morris and Jameson did not initially state that they had resigned their roles. However, the government moved quickly to announce their replacements on Monday evening.
Morris’ resignation was seen as especially significant. He is considered to be an ally of the health secretary, Wes Streeting, a likely leadership challenger. Another Streeting confidante, Jas Athwal – whose Ilford South constituency neighbours Streeting’s Ilford North seat – called for Starmer to resign on Monday afternoon.
Speaking on Tuesday morning, Jones conceded that he was “sad” about the state of affairs.
He told Sky News: “I’m a bit sad, to be honest… because I’m sad that we’re in this situation in the first place.
“I’m sad about the election results last Thursday when we lost many brilliant colleagues across the country, some of whom had served their local communities for many decades.
“So I’m sad that my team, my party, has ended up with a poor set of results. And I’m sad that a number of colleagues yesterday, have felt the need to have this conversation in public as opposed to internally within the party.
“So I am a bit sad about that, to be honest, but I’m also optimistic about the future because we’ve only been in government now for less than 2 years.”
Milford Haven Waterway, Wales
Tom Sawyer, CEO
| Port of Milford Haven
Energy security concerns amid global instability underline the urgent need for a whole-system approach – integrating oil and gas, hydrogen and renewables – to deliver a resilient future
Recent instability in the Middle East has served as a stark reminder that energy security cannot be taken for granted.
Against this backdrop, the UK stands at a decisive point.
The challenge is no longer simply to decarbonise individual sectors or maintain strong domestic and international supply chains, but to integrate them.
A whole-system approach – spanning oil and gas, hydrogen and renewables – must guide UK and Welsh government policy in the short to medium term if we are to deliver energy security, affordable prices and net-zero simultaneously.
Oil and gas remain foundational.
They underpin industrial activity, provide system flexibility and support thousands of skilled, well-paid jobs – including around 5,000 Welsh jobs linked to the Milford Haven Waterway alone.
In the near term, domestic gas production from the North Sea continues to play an important role in shielding the UK from external shocks.
Along the Haven, increased import capacity further strengthens gas resilience for both Britain and Europe.
At the same time, UK oil refining capacity is under significant pressure, following the closure of two British refineries in the past year alone.
However, the infrastructure, workforce and capabilities built around these sectors must now be harnessed to support future resilience.
Hydrogen is central to that future.
The UK government’s target of up to 10 GW of low-carbon hydrogen production by 2030 reflects its strategic importance.
Hydrogen offers a bridge between existing energy systems and future demand, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors such as heavy industry and transport.
Along the Haven, major projects led by MorGen Energy and RWE are progressing and could deliver up to a fifth of the national target.
At the same time, renewable electricity must continue to scale.
For South Wales and the South East of England, floating offshore wind (FLOW) will form the backbone of a future power system, while solar, marine energy and other emerging technologies will diversify supply and strengthen resilience.
Projects such as the Dragon Renewable Energy Park demonstrate the value of this multifaceted approach.
The importance of energy and carbon storage cannot be underestimated.
With the right regulatory and policy support, the Milford Haven CO2 Project can provide a vital pillar of Wales’ and the UK’s industrial future.
This is where a whole-system approach becomes critical.
Electricity generation, hydrogen production, fuel distribution, carbon capture and energy storage must be developed in tandem.
Ports such as Milford Haven sit at the heart of this integration.
As energy hubs, they connect offshore generation with onshore demand, enable fuel diversity, and provide the infrastructure needed for FLOW, hydrogen and CO2 shipping.
The UK government’s ambition to become a clean energy superpower recognises the need for a coordinated, system-wide transition.
But for success, policy delivery must go further.
We need accelerated grid capacity and stronger policy support for CO2 shipping to unlock significant infrastructure investment – in excess of £1bn on the Haven alone.
This will support regions like ours, where multiple technologies can co-exist, and our skilled workforce, natural assets and existing infrastructure can scale effectively.
The prize is significant.
A fully integrated energy system will enhance national resilience, support high-value jobs, and provide a more balanced and secure energy mix.
Oil and gas, hydrogen, renewables and storage all have a role to play – but only if they are deployed as part of a coherent strategy that recognises their interdependencies.
In the short to medium term, the task is clear: build on existing strengths while investing in future capability.
That means supporting oil and gas, accelerating hydrogen and storage deployment, and scaling renewables – all within a coherent, whole-system framework.
Energy security and energy resilience are not competing priorities; they are one and the same.
Spring Park Data Centre
Huw Owen, Chief Executive Officer
| Ark Data Centres
Rising oil price shocks, defence demands and strained services expose a system under pressure – making rapid digital reform essential if Britain is to deliver and compete in an AI-driven world
Every new twist in the energy and security crisis facing Britain sharpens the case for the fundamental rewiring of the state promised by Keir Starmer.
Oil price shocks stretch Whitehall budgets. Demand for increased defence spending intensifies. Departments are under pressure to simultaneously make savings and improve public services.
Calls for radical change in the way the government works come from all sides. Ministers and opposition parties want to harness artificial intelligence (AI) and digital tools to boost public sector productivity and make public services more responsive to individuals. Yet much of Whitehall is trying to run AI-enabled, data-driven services on archaic technology.
Departments cannot deliver more for less with systems that waste energy, drain resources and impede modernisation. Legacy IT – outdated and often obsolete technology systems, software, and hardware – blocks the government’s ambitions to modernise public services and build a state that works.
A new report from the Re:State think tank, From legacy to leadership: Upgrading the digital state, shows the scale of the challenge. One in four central government IT systems is now rated high risk, with many dating back decades and repeatedly patched. The government estimates outdated systems cost £45bn a year in lost productivity.
As CEO of Ark Data Centres, a British unicorn providing secure digital infrastructure for public services, I see the consequences daily. Departments are forced to focus on keeping existing systems operational rather than improving them. The result is slower services, higher costs, and growing fragility across the system.
Legacy IT is less secure and more vulnerable to cyber‑attack and prolonged outages. Too often we see years of underinvestment, followed by emergency funding after a failure, then a return to business as usual.
Energy and sustainability are also key issues. Older infrastructure is less efficient than modern alternatives, undermining the government’s net-zero ambitions.
This is not a problem any department can solve alone. When core systems fail, the impact spreads, hitting households, suppliers and frontline services. Four years ago, a record-breaking London heatwave caused failures in two ageing data centres at Guy’s Hospital and St Thomas’ Hospital that shut down clinical IT systems and disrupted patient care. Yet responsibility for fixing these foundations remains fragmented across Whitehall.
This is why Re:State’s recommendations are so welcome. Legacy IT needs to be treated as a cross‑government issue rather than a set of local problems. A Digital Modernisation Taskforce could identify the most critical risks, co-ordinate action across departments and embed prevention measures.
Crown Hosting Data Centres, a joint venture between the Cabinet Office and Ark Data Centres, stores sensitive data for Whitehall departments, public bodies including NHS trusts, local authorities and agencies like the Office for National Statistics in specialist facilities. Crown Hosting estimates the initiative cut costs by a third and electricity consumption by 75 per cent.
Government needs the tools to deliver efficient, reliable and trusted public services. Ministers are beginning to tackle this challenge through their Roadmap for Modern Digital Government and forthcoming Legacy IT Action Plan but need to go further and faster.
Without systemic change, ambitions for an AI-powered state cannot become a reality. Britain risks being left behind during the new global Industrial Revolution.
Daniel Dubois reclaimed world glory by stopping Fabio Wardley in the 11th round at Manchester’s Co-op Live Arena, turning a chaotic, knockdown strewn battle into a statement of power and resilience.
Dubois v Wardley brought early chaos and two dramatic knockdowns
The fight exploded into life in the opening seconds. Wardley landed a thunderous right hook that sent Dubois to the canvas inside 10 seconds. Then Wardley scored again in the third, leaving his opponent on one knee and looking vulnerable. What followed was not a measured chess match but a raw, physical war. Dubois staggered, regrouped and began to answer with heavy, fight-changing shots, something that looked unlikely after round one.
Hard hits and comebacks
Dubois’ recovery was textbook grit, movie script-esque. After the second knockdown he steadied himself, shifted gears and started to dismantle Wardley with a mix of jabs and clubbing right hands. By the fourth and sixth rounds he had Wardley bleeding and wobbling.
A sixth-round salvo nearly ended the contest. Wardley’s face told the story — a swollen eye, a cut nose, and yet he kept coming, refusing to fold.
The finish
The end came early in round 11. Dubois opened the stanza with a furious flurry that left Wardley unable to intelligently defend. Referee Howard Foster stepped in and waved the fight off, handing Dubois the WBO heavyweight title by stoppage. The victory made Dubois a two-time world champion and ended Wardley’s reign.
What does the result mean?
This fight went above and beyond what was expected. It delivered a fight for the ages.
For Dubois, it was a redemption arc, a response to the questions raised after his stoppage loss to Oleksandr Usyk and earlier setbacks.
For Wardley, it was a brutal reminder of the thin margin between toughness and being outgunned. His rise from white-collar boxing to world champion remains remarkable, but on this night, Dubois’ power and precision proved decisive.
Aftermath and what’s next?
Dubois celebrated a hard-fought win and praised Wardley’s heart, calling the contest “a war”. Promoter Frank Warren confirmed a rematch clause sits in the contract, so this rivalry is unlikely to end here. Both fighters leave Manchester with reputations burnished — Wardley for his iron chin and refusal to quit, Dubois for his capacity to absorb punishment and deliver the knockout blows when it mattered.
Key moments in the rounds
- Round 1: Wardley’s opening right drops Dubois inside 10 seconds; momentum swings wildly for Wardley.
- Round 3: Second knockdown for Wardley; Dubois takes time to recover and does not seem as though he will get through.
- Rounds 4–6: Dubois lands heavy hooks and jabs; Wardley begins to show visible damage as Dubois begins to wear him down.
- Round 11: Dubois’ flurry forces the stoppage, which ends the contest with an unbelievable finish.
Final round
This was heavyweight boxing in its most primal form. It was hard to watch but also extremely admirable — two men trading thunder, testing limits, and leaving everything in the ring.
Dubois’ win answers some lingering doubts about his resolve and power. Meanwhile, Wardley’s performance cements his status as one of Britain’s toughest heavyweights, even in defeat.
Expect nothing but war if, and when, they meet again.
Featured image via the Canary
By Faz Ali
On 10 May, a ‘Rally Against Antisemitism’ took place in London. While it’s good to oppose racism, people have questioned the organisers’ motives. As Green Party deputy Rachel Millward commented:
I will never attend a march fighting antisemitism, where Zack Polanski isn't invited but 'Gas the Jews' Nigel Farage is.
And well done to the over 2000 Jews who signed a petition to withdraw Farage's invite to this. https://t.co/8MOA5YYqtH
— Lisa Moorish (@LisaMoorish) May 10, 2026
People are specifically criticising the so-called ‘Board of Deputies of British Jews’, who were the ones to invite Nigel Farage but not Zack Polanski.
Polanski warning
The Board of Deputies of British Jews presents itself as a group which defends the interests of British Jewish people. People criticise the group for using their position to defend ‘Zionism’ – i.e. the ideology of Israel existing as an expansionist colonial state that serves as America’s foothold in the Middle East.
It’s easy to see why the Board don’t like Zack Polanski, anyway, as he’s previously called them out:
Conflating Antisemitism with criticism of the Israeli government is dangerous.
The Board of Deputies keep muddying the waters.
This isn’t about him being Jewish – it’s about his position as Vice-Chair of Labour Friends of Israel. https://t.co/9QBgY7EhMR
— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) January 15, 2026
On Sunday 10 May, the Guardian reported on an open letter criticising Reform UK’s inclusion at the event. The piece noted:
Michael Wegier, executive director of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, told Haaretz that Reform UK “is a serious party with many supporters, local councillors, and an increasing number of members of Parliament from month to month, which cannot be ignored. They have also expressed very broad support for the fight against antisemitism. There was no way we would not invite them.”
He added: “We did not invite the Greens’ Zack Polanski because we very strongly do not believe he has done enough to root out antisemitism from his party.”
The thing about Reform ‘fighting antisemitism’ is that the party is pretty blatantly not doing that. In fact, Reform seems to actively be tolerating known antisemites in its midst, as we’ve reported:
Mainstream media have spent days calling @ZackPolanski an antisemite; why are they silent on Reform's failure to suspend an actual antisemite?
By @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/VlrTrc7R3R
— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 4, 2026
Ben Rowe posted Islamophobic, antisemitic and racist memes. Reform said it was 'investigating', so how come he's now a sitting councillor?
Via @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/xKyGhLh6TI
— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 10, 2026
Another Reform activist just got exposed for antisemitism, and once again there's crickets from mainstream journalists and politicians
By @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/Ye7wR92fkd
— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 7, 2026
Clearly, an ‘anti-racist’ movement which includes Nigel Farage isn’t going anywhere. As such, it seems like the Board of Deputies aren’t trying to rally Britons against antisemitism; they’re trying to cut British Jews off from the mainstream British opinion that Israel is a genocidal rogue state:
if your protest against antisemitism involves nigel farage then it’s not a protest against antisemitism, it’s a protest in favour of division and exceptionality https://t.co/3XwGwlYnh3
— enter shakira𓅮 (@BARFJAMiN) May 10, 2026
‘Conspicuous absence’
On 1 May, the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland accused “proudly anti-racist voices” of going “silent when Jews are being stabbed in the streets”. Freedland was referring to the Golders Green attack, which ended up being less straightforward than the media initially suggested, as we covered:
On Wednesday 29 April, Essa Suleiman allegedly stabbed three men — two Jewish and one Muslim, in Golders Green. At the time of the attack, Suleiman was living in supported housing, having previously been detained in a secure hospital. Suleiman has a history of mental illness, and was referred to Prevent in the past.
The initial response was to label the incident an ‘antisemitic terror attack’, with the government raising the threat level in response. In light of the above information coming out, however, these moves would later seem to be premature. Much of the public would not become aware of this fact, however, as the media initially continued to report that Suleiman had only attacked two Jewish men – not that he had also attacked a Muslim man (each of these attacks are alleged at the point of publication).
In response to Freedland, Labour MP and current peer Luciana Berger asked the following:
Every word of this.
Where are the bands?
And the brands?
And the otherwise *proud* anti racists.I. Can’t. Hear. You.
You are conspicuous by your absence.
In response to the rally on 10 May, Berger attracted the following comments:
That Stop the Hate were one of the organisations associated with this told me everything. They come to counter Palestine rallies and play ‘another one bites the dust’ on loud speakers as people pass
— Phil (@Unofficial_Phil) May 10, 2026
Oppose racism in all its forms
To be clear, we absolutely stand with Jewish people who face antisemitism. What we don’t stand for is the political Zionist movement claiming it’s ‘antisemitic’ to take offence to Israel’s ongoing apartheid and genocide.
When outfits like the Board of British Deputies demand that Zionism must be tolerated within the broader anti-racist movement, they know exactly what they’re doing, and it’s not protecting the interests of British Jewish people.
Featured image via Sky News
By Willem Moore
Labour MP Catherine West is still urging Keir Starmer to set a timetable for resignation. Shortly after the May 2026 local elections, West made it clear that she would challenge Starmer, even if nobody else would.
Starmer: too little, too late
On the first Monday after the elections, Starmer made a speech clearly intended to steady the ship. However, West was less than impressed:
I have listened to the prime minister’s speech this morning. I welcome the renewed energy and ideas. However, I have reluctantly concluded that this morning’s speech was too little, too late.
And, West explained that she would still be making moves to push Starmer out:
The results last Thursday show that the prime minister has failed to inspire hope. What is best for the party and country now is for an orderly transition. I am hereby giving notice to No 10 that I am collecting names of Labour MPs to call on the prime minister to set a timetable for the election of a new leader in September.
Well-placed sources say that she has been persuaded to make her move in a more ‘Burnham-friendly’ way. West has sent a message to MPs inviting them to support her:
‘Burnham-friendly’
What ‘Burnham-friendly’ will mean exactly is still unclear, but Burnham’s camp are said to need weeks or a couple of months to prepare its own move. A list has been prepared of Labour MPs prepared to go public in their call for Starmer to go, after his long speech this morning failed to provide anything new except a move closer to the EU that seemed calculated to infuriate Reform supporters even further.
‘MSM’ journalists are still claiming she has ‘pulled back’ from her bid and is compiling a ‘petition’.
Featured image via the Canary
By Skwawkbox
Veteran human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell was assaulted and forced out by a mob at the Rally Against Antisemitism in Whitehall on Sunday 10 May.
He described attendees at the rally wrestling and shoving him and stealing a Free Palestine badge. He also received threats of violence if he attempted to rejoin the rally. And police even threatened him with arrest while taking no action against his attackers.
Tatchell said:
They ripped off my Free Palestine badge (which I wear everywhere), grabbed, wrestled, shoved and threatened me.
I was there to stand in solidarity with the Jewish community, against hate and violence. My placard said: ‘I stand with the Jewish community. Fight antisemitism. Love will triumph over hate.’
The assailants falsely accused me of supporting Hamas and terrorism against Jews. They said ‘f*ck off’, ‘get out’, ‘Jew hater’ and ‘terrorist supporter’.
I oppose Israel’s mass killing of Palestinian civilians, including 20,000 innocent children (according to Save the Children). But I also totally oppose terror attacks and have condemned Hamas as an antisemitic, sexist and homophobic dictatorship for many years.
The police who were present did not arrest my assailants or retrieve my badge. Officers threatened me with arrest for breach of the peace and escorted me, against my will, out of the rally area.
When I was out of the rally area, a group of aggressive, menacing men tracked me down and threatened violence. One said: ‘If you come back in, you won’t come out’ which I interpreted as an implied death threat.
This incident was not typical. I received many ‘thanks for attending’ from Jewish people at the rally. Some told me they opposed the war policies of the Netanyahu regime and, like me, supported a two-state solution.
My support for Jewish victims of hate crime is unconditional.
Tatchell has reported the assault to the police and is seeking charges against the assailants.
Featured image via Peter Tatchell Foundation
By The Canary
The May 2026 local elections in England saw sweeping gains for the far-right Reform UK. Whilst it could be tempting to dismiss these results for being limited to the council level, the will nevertheless have a massive effect on vulnerable groups in our society. That applies both in terms of Reform’s power and the politics it normalises.
The Canary’s HG, wrote that:
The reality is that we now have a bunch of men and women across the country wearing light blue who will show up to work tomorrow thinking they have a say in ‘closing the borders’ and ‘stopping the boats’.
They’re in for a nasty surprise tomorrow when they realise the things in their control amount to bin collections and potholes. The only thing they’re stopping is traffic with ‘temporary’ roadworks.
Thank fuck that Reform is in charge of budgets for bins, potholes and planning permission, rather than the UK’s defence budget, international relations and our beloved NHS.
However, this isn’t to say that we can disregard the impact of local policy. Local government holds immense power over our daily lives, and that applies twofold for the more vulnerable among us. These people are in very real danger from the far-right scum who now sit in their town halls.
Reform are racism and white supremacy
Back in March, a Hope Not Hate report exposed the fact that over half of Reform members want UK citizens who weren’t born here out of the country. 30% of Reform members think that only if the individual in question is Black or brown. For 15%, that same sentiment also applies to second-generation Black and brown citizens.
That’s white ethnonationalism, plain and simple. Couple that with the fact that newly elected Reform councillors have spouted bile like stating that “the Hallocaust [sic] is a hoax”, calling Muslims “pure scum”, saying Nigerians should be melted down to “fill in the potholes”, and celebrating the rape of a Sikh woman.
As such, we at the Canary have no problem calling Reform and its supporters ‘white supremacists’. Given the clear backing for such a racist party, and the rhetoric its MPs and councillors have normalised, it’s no surprise that ethnic minority groups are bracing themselves for a yet-further rise in racism.
For example, Oxford-based anti-racism campaigner Shaista Aziz told the Guardian that:
Many British Muslim communities feel scared and intimidated by the Reform victories and also feel sad that their neighbours have voted for a party that openly calls for the deportation of members of our communities and can’t call out their councillors for their deeply racist rhetoric.
Likewise, regarding the slew of new Reform councillors in Birmingham, Muslim Women’s Network chair Shaista Gohir asked:
What does that mean for [communities] in terms of our safety, the quality of services that we’re going to receive? Is anti-Muslim rhetoric going to really escalate locally? There is a lot of concern.
A threat in local government
Beyond the racism and Islamophobia they stoke, the victims of Reform councils are often older or disabled people, or vulnerable children who rely on local support. For them, and their counterparts in the other new Reform areas across England, the power of Reform councillors has devastating consequences.
As an example, take the existing Reform council in Kent. Despite pledging to find £40m in potential savings, the council actually increased the budget overspend to £46.5m. Likewise, in defiance of its earlier promises, the council also hiked council tax by 4%.
One senior local cabinet member complained that:
Everyone thought we’d come in and there was going to be these huge costs we could cut away, but there just aren’t.
On the contrary, the Reformers found that just 1.2% of their budget went to head off costs. Meanwhile, 71.6% goes to statutory adult and children’s social care. However, the Socialist Worker reported that
Nevertheless, Reform UK found some “unnecessary” spending. It cut £1.2 million from fostering services and £700,000 from fostering for children with disabilities.
Likewise, the Conversation reported similar stories elsewhere:
In Derbyshire, the Reform-led council’s plan to shut eight care homes was called a “betrayal of local people”. Similar plans in Lancashire entailed the closure of five public care homes as well as five day centres, with residents moved to the private sector.
What is striking is not just the direction of policy, but also the political reaction to it. The privatisation plans in Lancashire were eventually abandoned due to strong local opposition, which came not only from rival parties, but also from Reform grassroots members.
Moving forward together
Meanwhile, Nigel Farage himself appeared on BBC Radio Sussex in April to call adult social care bill “enormous” and a “huge burden” on local councils. He was brazen about the fact that Reform has no real plan for the service, but said that it was “looking at radical options”.
So yes – last week’s local elections aren’t the same as the far-right party gaining control of parliament. However, the new rise of local authorities in Reform’s clutches still spells disaster for many of the most vulnerable among us.
This party’s rhetoric is dangerous. Its actions and its supporters are a threat, both at the local and national level. Over the coming years, we must ensure that we do not leave behind the marginalised communities who are living under the greatest risk precisely because of their reliance on local care and support.
Featured image via the Canary
John Curtis arrived in the Senate just 16 months ago. He’s already eyeing a possible move back home.
The Utah Republican’s inner circle is actively canvassing donors and allies in Utah to gauge support for a gubernatorial bid in 2028, according to six people involved with or briefed on the discussions. They were granted anonymity to detail private conversations. His allies have asked donors in recent months to hold off on supporting other gubernatorial candidates until Curtis makes up his mind. And his chief of staff has said his boss is keeping the door open.
“John Curtis is going to serve where the people of Utah want him to serve,” Corey Norman, Curtis’ chief of staff, told POLITICO.
Curtis, who replaced former Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) last year, has a reputation as a pragmatic dealmaker and moderate voice from his three terms in the U.S. House. But after seeing Washington grow increasingly polarized during his decade there, the former mayor and business executive may see the benefits of returning home.
“He doesn’t love being in the Senate,” said a Utah Republican operative who has discussed Curtis’ political future with him. “Trump’s MAGA base sees him as one of the four squishiest Republicans. He’s basically Mitt without the stature.”
The timing of Curtis’ exploration is tethered to former GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who is quietly attempting to clear the 2028 gubernatorial field for himself since Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced he wouldn’t seek a third term.
A potential Chaffetz-Curtis primary in 2028 would likely mirror the Republican Party’s own ideological battles as it enters its first presidential election without Trump on the ballot in over a decade. Chaffetz is one of the Trump administration’s staunchest defenders on Fox News; Curtis is a self-described “Reagan Republican” and occasional Trump critic more in the mold of his predecessor, Romney.
Earlier this year, as Chaffetz began asking Utah donors and elected officials to back him, Curtis received an influx of inquiries about a run of his own, according to two people close to the senator, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Curtis first rebuffed the proddings; now, he is actively exploring it.
“The first time I asked John about this, and the third and fourth and fifth time, his answer was, ‘Have I said hell no lately?’” said one longtime friend. “And now his response has changed dramatically.”
Just in the last few weeks, the friend said, “there has been a very meaningful change in his thinking.”
The ad-hoc team of advisers, friends and longtime allies that are now canvassing donors have a goal of securing $10 million in pledges. Curtis’ current outlook, a second longtime friend said, is, “If there’s a pathway forward and I felt like it was clear to me that citizens wanted me to do it, then I would do it.”
Curtis, an avid outdoorsman and practicing Latter-day Saint, went on a retreat in the mountains recently to pray and meditate about running, according to the first longtime friend. Now Curtis is planning a 250-mile solo walk across the state to honor the U.S.’ 250th anniversary, concluding on July 4 in Provo, Utah, a second person close to the senator said. The walk will give Curtis additional time to meditate on his political future.
Meanwhile, Chaffetz, who Curtis replaced in the U.S. House when the former left Congress for a gig on Fox News, is holding regular meetings with local lawmakers and donors across the state to ask for their support, and he’s begun transferring funds from a federal PAC to a state PAC.
“His pitch is that he is the likely nominee and he invites them to get in early while they still can,” said a second longtime Utah GOP operative who hasn’t chosen sides in the potential primary, granted anonymity to discuss the topic openly. “You can tell from his finance disclosures that he has had limited success on that front.” Chaffetz did not respond to a request for comment.
Keeping the door open now may be an attempt to avoid repeating past mistakes: Curtis initially vowed he wouldn’t run for Romney’s seat, but he changed his mind and made a late entry into the 2024 GOP primary field after being urged to run by Utah donors, politicos and Romney allies. It was a tough fight, as former Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson and others had already locked up supporters across the state. But Curtis rallied and garnered over 50 percent of the vote in a crowded primary.
“He’s not going to cede early ground to Chaffetz like he did to Wilson in the Senate race,” the second Utah GOP political operative said. “It’s now to the point where I would be surprised if Curtis doesn’t run.”
Curtis entered the Senate in 2025 amid much fanfare among Trump-skeptical Republicans who hoped he would fill the role of his predecessor, Romney, as a frequent critic of and check on the president. Curtis had earned a reputation during his time in the House as a China hawk and a rare Republican voice supporting conservation, as founder of the House’s Conservative Climate Caucus. He was one of the most effective House members, passing 27 bills during his three terms.
But the Senate has proved to be a difficult place for a consensus-minded pragmatist like Curtis. He failed to get a seat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee which his fellow Utahn, Sen. Mike Lee, chairs. Though he bucked the Trump administration on several occasions — he was credited with torpedoing several Trump nominees, and he fought to protect clean energy tax credits in the One Beautiful Bill Act — he voted in line with Trump 100% of the time in 2025, per VoteHub’s tally. (He eventually relented and voted for the reconciliation package — with a gradual rollback of some credits included.)
Curtis often tells allies his favorite job was as mayor of Provo, Utah, where he could enact change as the city’s nonpartisan chief executive, according to two other people close to the senator.
Norman, the senator’s longtime chief of staff, has made the rounds on local media hinting that his boss is open to a run for governor. During an appearance on KSL NewsRadio on April 9, he said his boss “hasn’t said yes, he hasn’t said no.” During an interview with ABC4 that aired Sunday, Norman was more blunt: “He is an executive problem solver at heart, and in my opinion, he would make an exceptional governor.”
Curtis could retain his seat in the U.S. Senate while running for governor. If he wins, he would select his successor from three options provided by the state legislature.
There is a growing contingent of Utah politicos who want him in the governor’s mansion.
“Chaffetz is the only one out there right now and folks are looking for an alternative that has the ability to beat him,” said a third Utah GOP operative, granted anonymity to speak openly. “It just sucks that he’s forcing the field to start so early. A two-plus year run for governor is absurd.”
Curtis’ openness about the possibility of a gubernatorial run — a full two-and-a-half years before November 2028 — is rankling some allies. The topic arose at a wedding for Romney’s grandson last week, where Romney’s allies and former staffers mingled. They acknowledged Curtis would make a good governor but wanted to see him finish out his term in the Senate, according to one individual present, granted anonymity to discuss a private conversation.
But all were frustrated by Curtis’ team signaling at his intentions this early in the cycle. “It’s pretty early to leak it all out,” the person said. “Way too early.”
London politics LIVE: Starmer ‘deciding’ whether to quit as PM as he faces Cabinet showdown
Intel Corporation: A Good Story At The Wrong Price – A DCF Narrative
Michael Saylor defends Strategy’s Bitcoin sales plan amid dividend concerns
Manchester United reach agreement with Casemiro over contract clause amid transfer speculation
US brings back mandatory military draft registration
Steven Gerrard disagrees with Gary Neville over ‘shock’ Chelsea and Arsenal claim | Football
-
Crypto World4 days agoHarrisX Poll Found 52% of Registered Voters Support the CLARITY Act
-
Fashion4 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Marianne Dress
-
Crypto World5 days agoUpbit adds B3 Korean won pair as Base token gains Korea access
-
NewsBeat5 days agoNCP car park operator enters administration putting 340 UK sites at risk of closure
-
Fashion14 hours agoCoffee Break: Travel Steam Iron
-
Tech2 days agoAuto Enthusiast Carves Functional Two-Stroke Engine from Solid Metal
-
Politics10 hours agoWhat to expect when you’re expecting a budget
-
Fashion1 day agoWhat to Know Before Buying a Curling Wand or Curling Iron
-
Politics3 days agoPolitics Home Article | Starmer Enters The Danger Zone
-
Business3 days agoIgnore market noise, India’s long-term story intact, say D-Street bulls Ramesh Damani and Sunil Singhania
-
Crypto World7 days agoUAE Free Zone Deploys Blockchain IDs to Verify Registered Firms
-
Tech1 day agoGM Agrees To Pay $12.75 Million To Settle California Lawsuit Over Misuse Of Customers’ Driving Data
-
Crypto World6 days agoBlackRock CEO Larry Fink Discusses a New Asset Class
-
Entertainment5 days agoSarah Paulson Called Out For Met Gala ‘Hypocrisy’
-
Crypto World5 days agoRobinhood says Wall Street is building onchain
-
Sports6 days agoNBA playoff winners and losers: Austin Reaves is not loving Lakers vs. Thunder matchup, but Chet Holmgren is
-
Entertainment5 days agoGeneral Hospital: Ric & Ava Bombshell – Ric’s Massive Secret Exposed!
-
Entertainment6 days agoBold and Beautiful Early Spoilers May 11-15: Steffy Revolted & Liam Overjoyed!
-
Tech6 days agoApple and Samsung are dominating smartphone sales so thoroughly that only one other company makes the top 10
-
Fashion5 days agoThe Best Work Pants for Women in 2026
You must be logged in to post a comment Login