Politics
Nigel Farage’s key Fundraising Advisor is a convicted fraudster who’s writing a book called ‘How to Launder Money’
Most people have probably never heard of George Cottrell. But – like Alastair Campbell to Tony Blair, or Dominic Cummings to Boris Johnson – Cottrell is a man who could be just a few years away from becoming one of the most important behind-the-scenes figures in Number 10, should Nigel Farage become Prime Minister at the next General Election.
Stay in touch!
Sign up to be updated with Evolve’s latest stories, and for opportunities to get involved.
However, whilst both Campbell and Cummings only became publicly synonymous for dodgy behaviour within Downing Street, Cottrell already has a vast repertoire of misdemeanours and accusations to his name – including a criminal conviction for fraud, and involvement in organisations that broke electoral law during Brexit.
In addition, Cottrell has also been accused of money laundering on several occasions, and has even been accused of funneling money through cryptocurrency to illegally fund a Montenegrin political party – accusations which he, through his lawyers, has denied.
And, as if that wasn’t enough already, Cottrell has quite literally just written a book entitled: ‘How To Launder Money’.
Yes. Seriously.
Despite all of these massive red flags and huge neon flashing ‘WARNING’ signs against both his character and conduct, Cottrell has become arguably Farage’s most trusted fundraising advisor over the last decade – with the Reform leader even going so far as to describe him as ‘like a son to me’, and being flanked by ‘Posh George’ at virtually every public and private event.
In the UK, it is illegal for political parties and politicians to accept money or gifts from foreign sources, and it is also against the law to accept anonymous or unidentified donations, or to take money laundered in ways that obscure the true source of funds.
So why, then, would Farage – a politician whose party is currently roaring ahead in the polls, and who will clearly want to keep his nose clean and present a professional image in order to ensure he becomes Prime Minister – keep a convicted criminal, someone who seems to be perpetually mired in allegations of murky financial dealings, so close by his side?
In this article, we’ll explain everything you need to know about George Cottrell, and why – if you want the best for this country – how politics is funded really, really matters.
Posh George
George Cottrell was born in 1993 into a wealthy and well-connected British family with aristocratic ties. His father, Mark, is a businessman and landowner from Gloucestershire, and his mother, Fiona, is the daughter of Rupert Watson, 3rd Baron Manton.
Cottrell was privately educated on the luxury Caribbean island of Mustique, and later attended Malvern College in Worcestershire – an exclusive private school where fees are now more than £30,000 a year. However, after being expelled from Malvern, reportedly due to his illegal underage gambling habit, he was reportedly offered a job raising capital for a corporate finance house, leading to him helping to set up a multibillion-pound private office in Mayfair for a well-known ‘international’ family.
According to the Telegraph it was here that Cottrell “learned about the murky and complicated world of ‘shadow banking’, secret offshore accounts and sophisticated financial structures in such jurisdictions as Panama, Andorra and Switzerland. He did well, and was soon working as a London-based banker for an offshore private bank (which was under investigation by the US authorities as a ‘foreign financial institution of primary money-laundering concern’).”
It was a smooth transition from here and into politics for Posh George, as his social connections and financial experience helped him enter the inner circles of UKIP where, in 2013, he was introduced to Nigel Farage by his aristocratic uncle, Lord Hesketh, a former treasurer of the party.
In just a few short months Cottrell became a trusted figure within the party, operating in Farage’s inner circle at UKIP, helping to manage campaign finances, booking Farage’s helicopters, and travelling with the party leader during events and media appearances. He was first promoted to head of fundraising, and later served as UKIP’s deputy treasurer during the 2015 general election campaign.
However, in 2016, things came crashing down.
Conviction for Wire Fraud
While attending the Republican National Convention alongside Nigel Farage, Cottrell was arrested by US authorities and indicted on 21 charges, including conspiracy to commit money laundering, wire fraud, blackmail, and extortion. However, he accepted a plea deal in which prosecutors agreed to drop 20 of the charges in return for him pleading guilty to a single count of wire fraud, for which he received an eight-month sentence, most of which he had already served pending trial.
The case arose from a long-running undercover operation by US federal authorities investigating schemes to launder money through offshore accounts and the dark web. Cottrell was recorded explaining methods by which illicit funds could be moved and concealed.
As Evolve reported at the time:
“Someone known as ‘The Banker’ advertised money-laundering service via dark-web site the Onion Router. Some customers from Phoenix, Arizona, duly responded, whom the mysterious ‘Banker’ directed to the equally mysterious ‘Bill’, later outed as Cottrell.
“According to Cottrell’s own admission to the court, he offered:
“Ways to transfer large amounts of cash out of the United States to avoid reporting requirements and disguising proceeds from criminal activity as legitimate business income for tax purposes.”
“He also admitted:
“I falsely claimed that I would launder the criminal proceeds through my bank accounts for a fee. Rather than launder any of the money, though, I intended to retain the money.”
“In short, Cottrell intended to defraud drug traffickers of their ill-gotten gains and hope they wouldn’t take action against him. Not the safest or, frankly, smartest way to make a quick buck.
“Cottrell communicated with them via ‘Cryptocat,’ offering his money-laundering skills and met them in Las Vegas where, by his own admission, they transferred $20,000 to an associate in Colorado who then transferred it back. Having shown his clients his system worked (deeply incriminating himself in the process), Cottrell then tried to blackmail them.
“He demanded they pay him 130 Bitcoin, then worth around $80,000, to stop him revealing their drug trafficking and money-laundering to the proper authorities. Unfortunately for our aristocratic master criminal, he didn’t know he was already speaking to the proper authorities.”
UKIP’s EU Funds Scandal
In November 2016, the European Parliament found that a political group led by UKIP MEPs had unlawfully spent over €173,000 (£148,000) of EU funds on activities related to UKIP’s 2015 UK general election campaign and the Brexit referendum – a period when Cottrell was serving as UKIP’s deputy treasurer. Furthermore, UKIP MEPs were also found to have unlawfully spent EU money on national campaigning purposes during 2014–2016.
UKIP was told to repay almost £1m in total to the European Parliament, whilst Nigel Farage, then leader of UKIP, had €40,000 docked from his EU salary to cover funds that he had misspent. Other MEPs involved included the current Reform Party Deputy Chair, Paul Nuttall, who also faced scrutiny over his expenses related to the misuse of EU funds.
Leave.EU Financial Irregularities
Then, in 2017, the Electoral Commission investigated Leave.EU and its financial vehicle, Better for the Country Ltd (BFTC), over their fundraising and spending during the 2016 EU Brexit campaign – organisations for which Cottrell was said to be a “key member of” during the referendum.
The Commission raised concerns that some donations may have come from sources not legally permitted to contribute to UK referendum campaigns, and found that the organisations had not fully reported all services received or the value of in-kind contributions, including work from overseas companies.
They also found discrepancies between reported donations and financial records, suggesting misreporting of values or sources. Certain aspects of the case were referred to the National Crime Agency, which ultimately concluded there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges. However, Leave.EU was fined £70,000 (brought down to £66,000 on appeal) for misreporting donations and services, while BFTC was scrutinised but not fined.
During an interview with the Telegraph, Cottrell also admitted to using his insider knowledge to place massive bets on the referendum result after polls had closed on Brexit eve:
“At 10pm, I couldn’t believe I was still getting 9/1 [for a majority leave vote]. We were in our campaign office and I was tracking all the major stock indices, the dollar and pound currency markets. When it got to 3am, I was getting my managers out of bed to get me another 50 grand on here, another 50 grand there, to short sterling. I just couldn’t help myself.”
According to The Telegraph, Cottrell won a six figure sum that night, but he “lost most of it the next day, on some horse running called Exit Europe or something like that. I was a compulsive, habitual, addicted gambler.”
The Montenegrin Crypto Allegations
Following Cottrell’s conviction, he seemingly moved to Montenegro – a well-known centre for cryptocurrency and other blockchain technologies due to its lax laws and lack of regulation – travelling there more than 100 times under a passport name of ‘George Co.’ and conducting business activities there through a company called ‘Private Family Office‘.
It was here, at the luxurious Maestral Casino in Budva, that Cottrell reportedly lost £16m in one night in a high stakes game of poker.
However, this astonishing incident is, surprisingly, not the most controversial incident of Cottrell’s time in the tiny European nation.
In 2023, Montenegrin police raided the Salon Privé casino in the coastal region of Tivat and found an illegal cryptocurrency ATM – a machine designed specifically to convert cryptocurrency directly into cash.
The then Montenegrin Finance Minister, Aleksandar Damjanović, claimed that the machine was linked to Cottrell, and alleged that he was using it to illegally fund an insurgent politician, former Goldman Sachs banker Milojko Spajić, and the election campaign of his Europe Now! (PES) movement – claims that Cottrell’s lawyers have denied.
Following the raid, the then Justice Minister – and former Europe Now! member – Andrej Milović, claimed that:
“George Cottrell, according to information from insiders in their meetings, financed and helped Milojko (Spajić). He was introduced to him by his godfather MT, who connected him with global crypto investors, some of whom are on the wrong side of the law, like Cottrell. Money “donations” were arranged in Podgorica and along the coast, meetings were held on yachts in Luštica and Porto Montenegro, with the presence of certain Arab investors, and Cottrell also visited the premises of PES,”
Under Montenegrin law, all foreign citizens – including Cottrell, who is legally a British citizen – are banned from funding domestic politicians and political parties.
Cottrell’s lawyers have categorically denied any wrongdoing, stating that he had no financial ties to the casino and had never operated the machine. They also said that Cottrell did not personally fund Spajić’s campaign.
Europe Now! went on to win the election, and Spajić was made Prime Minister. Montenegrin authorities have now dropped the investigations.
Geostrategy – The Unlimited Company
Cottrell has now seemingly returned in the UK on a permanent basis and is back as an advisor to Nigel Farage, having been seen accompanying the Reform leader on numerous public and private occasions – including being directly beside Farage when he was infamously ‘milkshaked’ whilst campaigning during the 2024 General Election outside the Moon and Starfish Wetherspoons in Clacton-on-sea.
And now, OpenDemocracy reports that Cottrell has just incorporated a new company purporting to conduct political strategy and polling, named Geostrategy International Unlimited.
However, whilst Geostrategy claim to conduct polling, they are not a member of the British Polling Council, and whilst its website advertises that the company conducts “Party and Candidate Management”, it does so alongside footage of meetings with Montenegrin Prime Minister Milojko Spajic, who Cottrell’s lawyers strenuously denied he worked for during the election campaign.

More importantly, though, Geostrategy has been set up as an ‘Unlimited Company’ – a rarely-used form of incorporation which means it doesn’t have to file public accounts, but can still make political donations.
Anti-corruption campaigners have warned that due to the way Geostrategy has been set up, it could act as a “backdoor for illegal donations” – such as money from foreign sources that has been laundered through offshore accounts but reported as donations from permissible UK citizens to the Electoral Commission.
Speaking to Open Democracy, the director of Spotlight on Corruption, Susan Hawley, said:
“With the complete financial secrecy that unlimited companies offer, they can easily be abused by those who want to shield their accounts from secrecy,”
“The fact that Geostrategy has no other business footprint in the UK also raises real red flags about this arrangement.”
“We would urge the Electoral Commission to keep a close eye on these sorts of arrangements to ensure they do not provide a backdoor for illegal donations in the UK”.
Shortly before Geostrategy was incorporated, cash donations totalling £750,000 were made to Reform UK in the name of George’s mother, Fiona Cottrell – one of £250,000 in February 2025, and two of £250,000 in May 2025 – seemingly the only political donations she has ever made to any political party, according to the Electoral Commission.

The Clacton House
Reform leader Nigel Farage has also had a lot of questions to answer over his personal financial affairs lately – not least over the £885,000 house located in his Clacton constituency that he initially claimed to have bought himself, before later admitting that it was actually purchased outright – in cash – by his partner, Laure Ferrari.
Back in November 2024, after receiving significant backlash from locals who claimed he never spent time in his Clacton constituency, Farage proudly declared that he had now finally “exchanged contracts” on a house in the area – a four-bed detached house, complete with an outdoor heated swimming pool, located in the posh part of town, Frinton-on-Sea.
However, in September 2025, following Farage’s criticism of the now former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner’s underpayment of Stamp Duty, journalists and campaigners began digging into the Reform leader’s own financial affairs – at which point a rather large discrepancy was discovered: Nigel Farage hadn’t, in fact, bought the Clacton house at all. Official Land Registry documents showed that his partner, Laure Ferrari, was the sole owner – and that she had somehow bought the house outright, in cash, without the need for a mortgage.
Had Farage bought the house himself, he would have been liable for the higher rates of Stamp Duty because he already owns property. However, as Ferrari does not own property in the UK, she qualifies as a first-time buyer and only needed to pay the lower rate. This arrangement effectively means Farage avoided paying around £44,000 in tax by not purchasing the property himself, according to media estimates.
The Reform leader responded to the Land Registry findings by saying that he had “misspoke” and was “wrong to say I had bought it” – before insisting that the money used to buy the property was entirely Ferrari’s, attributing the fact she somehow managed to have a spare £885,000 lying down the back of the sofa to her “wealthy family”. But subsequent reports cast serious doubt on his claims, with a BBC investigation into Ferrari’s parents’ company filings and property records suggesting little sign of substantial familial wealth.
Yet, even though Farage could have legally gifted the money to Ferrari in order to buy the property, he continues to insist that he did not provide any funds and has absolutely no financial stake in the property.
So where did the money really come from? It’s all rather a big mystery.
Cottrell’s New Book – “How To Launder Money”
And finally, and perhaps most perplexingly, we come to the very recent announcement that Mr Cottrell is writing a book, conspicuously titled – and I am genuinely not making this up – “How To Launder Money”.
That’s right, just six days ago on September 24th, Biteback Publishing proudly announced that in February they will be publishing “a unique insiders’ guide to money laundering” co-written by Nigel Farage’s closest advisor and long-time political fundraiser, George Cottrell, alongside the “international financial investigator” Lawrence Burke Files.

The book claims to be a guide to aid governments and law enforcement authorities on how to properly crack down on financial crimes, and the authors say they “aim to show the general public how it’s possible for a few hundred million to go missing without a trace”.
However, what do they think the problem causing rampant money laundering and other financial crimes? That’s right, it’s “overregulation” – too many laws.
And according to the foreward to the book written by Biteback, the book supposedly shows how current money laundering regulations are “doing more damage than ever before.”
Yes, it genuinely appears that, through the book, Cottrell and his co-author will try to convince policymakers that relaxing laws on money laundering and other financial crimes are the real way to solve the problem.
It should also be noted that the publisher of the book, Biteback Publishing, is co-owned by the billionaire former Tory donor – who claimed non-dom status, sheltered assets in offshore trusts, lived as a tax exile in Belize, and was a star of the Panama Papers – the veritable Final Boss of tax avoidance, Lord Michael Ashcroft.
Analysis
It’s incredibly obvious to anyone even remotely interested in UK politics that corruption, cronyism, and dirty money is still a huge issue that’s skewing and scarring our democratic process.
There are currently numerous loopholes and ambiguities built into electoral law that allow anybody with the right financial knowledge to obscure the true source of funds if they want to, and the Electoral Commission – the independent body tasked with monitoring and regulating political financing – lacks anywhere near the necessary powers to genuinely investigate where suspicious donations might have actually come from.
When you take into account the countless number offshore banking entities that are available to individuals looking to hide the source of their funds – many of which are located in British overseas territories such as the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, and UK Crown Dependencies such as Jersey and the Isle of Man – all it really takes is a bit of careful financial planning to get away with it.
UK Electoral Law also currently allows political parties to be funded via cryptocurrency – which, through just a couple of transactions, can leave the true source of funds essentially entirely untraceable. Reform UK is currently the only British political party to accept donations in crypto.
However, whilst Reform’s website forces crypto donors to prove their identity via third party software, this only proves who made the final donation – not where the actual funds truly came from.
Speaking to Byline Times, the Executive Director of Spotlight on Corruption, Dr Susan Hawley, said that this practice of gifting cryptocurrency is impossible to ban unless you ban crypto donations entirely, stating: “as long as the (crypto) donation comes from a permissible donor, it doesn’t matter who gave that permissible donor the money.
Before adding: “Under the current regime, it seems to me that just having the identity of the last handler of the crypto, so to speak, is not really much protection for British democracy.”
“At the very least, consideration must be given to banning donations using cryptocurrencies that are designed to enable anonymity and mixing of legitimate and illicit funds, and those without a public or open ledger [record], and that are unsupported by a central bank.”
When taken together, these legal loopholes mean that any UK political party or politician could be being funded by wealthy foreign individuals and organisations, or even representatives of adversaries to the UK, who have ulterior motives – such as those wanting to push potentially disastrous policies that ultimately only benefit them and their company or country, whilst damaging the UK – and the British public would simply never know.
The government say that they will be introducing new legislation next year that aims to strengthen electoral law and make it harder for political parties and politicians to obscure the true source of political donations.
Labour say that the Elections Bills will make it harder for foreign companies to transfer money into UK shell companies that do not generate UK income, and will force political parties to carry out enhanced checks on donors to ensure their funds do not ultimately come from foreign sources.
In addition, the Electoral Commission will be given powers to impose fines of up to £500,000 on those that break the rules with false or misleading declarations that constitutes a criminal offence.
However, the rules are not expected to impose any cap on donations, and the government is also reportedly not expected to ban donations made via cryptocurrency – leaving various loopholes open for potentially malicious foreign actors to exploit.
I think it’s safe to say that the UK’s political process may continue to be flooded with dirty money for a little while longer – all so politicians can profit, whilst our country suffers the consequences.
Politics
PMQs: Who’s Asking the Questions?
Johanna Baxter (Lab) Julie Minns (Lab) Kerry McCarthy (Lab) Charlie Dewhirst (Con) Luke Charters (Lab) Alex Baker (Lab) Jonathan Brash (Lab) Neil Hudson (Con) Alan Strickland (Lab) Helen Hayes (Lab) Layla Moran (LibDem) Ben Goldsborough (Lab) Christine Jardine (LibDem) Chris Coghlan (LibDem)
Politics
Is Lady Danbury Leaving Bridgerton? Producer Jess Brownell Speaks Out
Bridgerton showrunner Jess Brownell has a reassuring update for anyone worried about Lady Danbury’s future in the hit period drama.
After three seasons as Queen Charlotte’s right-hand woman in the popular Netflix series, Adjoa Andoh’s character has been seen in the latest run of episodes contemplating whether she wants more for herself.
After Lady Danbury’s declaration that she intends to step back from service, many fans have been concerned that this could mean Adjoa may not be appearing in the coming seasons of Bridgerton.
However, during a recent interview with Deadline, Bridgerton’s executive producer said she and her team have “no intentions” of that being the case.
“I want to say very clearly that we have no intentions of Adjoa stepping back,” she insisted. “She’s still absolutely a part of the story in season five.
She continued: “It was more about wanting to explore the dynamic between a friendship in which there’s a power imbalance, which is very on theme with this season, where we’re looking at the relationship between servants and their employers.”
She continued: “The Queen and Lady Danbury are real friends, but because of the power imbalance, it was interesting to explore what happens when Lady Danbury wants to do something for herself. It was an opportunity to explore new depth for their friendship.”
As Brownell stated, themes of power and class are being explored in all areas of Bridgerton season four, including its central love story between Luke Thompson and Yerin Ha’s characters.
Luke and Yerin recently explained how these divisions led to the setting of one of the stand-out steamy scenes between characters Benedict Bridgerton and Sophie Baek, who grow close after meeting at a masquerade ball early on in season four.

The first half of Bridgerton’s fourth season is currently streaming on Netflix, with part two following on Thursday 26 February.
Politics
Rafe Fletcher: Statist Singapore builds homes whilst statist Britain just plans
Rafe Fletcher is the founder of CWG and writes The Otium Den Substack
You can regularly eat and drink for free in Singapore.
Just turn up at one of the British property seminars that pepper the city’s function rooms. Developers and agents swallow the cost of a few freeloaders because it has been a fruitful market. Singaporeans are the second largest group of foreign home owners across England and Wales.
Demand isn’t spurred by colonial nostalgia. Rather, Singaporeans can buy a second home in Britain with far less hassle than in Singapore. And developers welcome the liquidity lacking in those supported only by a British-earned income. Just as a punitive tax regime leaves British buyers short of a deposit, so builders find construction can leave them short of a profit once they have navigated nebulous planning diktats.
Confronting the resulting housing bubble may look awkward for the Conservatives. Even in 2024, 37 percent of outright homeowners voted for them, a 12-point lead on Labour in second place. But the consequences of ducking the issues are starker. Those homeowners will see values deplete anyway under Labour’s trajectory of making everyone poorer. And the Conservatives will make no inroads with a generation shut out of the housing market.
It’s a lesser problem in Singapore where 90 per cent of citizens are homeowners. A product of mass public housebuilding under the Housing and Development Board (HDB). Only Singaporeans are eligible to buy these properties. Buyers draw upon their Central Provident Fund (CPF), a forced personal savings system to put down a deposit on HDBs’ subsidised values. Mortgages are offered with fixed interest rates of 2.6 per cent.
The HDB market is heavily restricted. They can’t be purchased by non-citizens and Singaporeans can only own one unit at a time. Re-sales are prohibited for five years, so there’s no “flipping” on the back of sudden value increases. If Singaporeans want to buy a second home, they must enter the fully private market, which constitutes just 20 per cent of the country’s housing stock. Doing so incurs 20 per cent stamp duty on any second property and 30% on additional ones after that.
Hence why buying in Britain is much more attractive where non-resident stamp duty is only two percent. With far lower tax rates and HDBs available at 3.8 times average income, Singaporeans have the means to buy British stock. Penalising such foreign buyers may play well optically. But as it is, they’re vital in getting homes built. Britain’s largest developer Barratt Redrow recently blamed a lack of them for missing its sales target. International capital helps developers meet affordable housing provisions under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act. Without buyers for higher-price units, the think-tank Onward reports that the cost of delivering new homes often exceeds their capital values.
Section 106 is one of many regulatory hurdles strangling supply. Onward’s research shows that small and medium-sized (SME) developers have been effectively priced out of the market. In the late 1980s, SMEs delivered about 40 per cent of new homes; by 2007, 30 per cent; and today just 12 per cent. They don’t have the scale or balance sheet to weather the costly and cumbersome planning permission process.
Mired in such regulation, Britain’s housing policy is hardly less statist than Singapore. But that statism resides in obstructiveness instead of forcefulness. Singapore can build because the state owns 90 per cent of the land (HDBs and most private housing are on 99-year leases). A situation engineered through the Land Acquisition Act of 1966 that empowers the government to buy any land it wishes at current market value. It is frustrating for golfers as the city-state’s few remaining courses are forcibly purchased to make way for new housing. But it gives the government total control over the supply-chain and costs.
A similar land grab is probably only contemplated by Zack Polanski in Britain. And it’s more likely to resemble Zimbabwe if it comes under the Greens. But there are other lessons Britain can learn from Singapore.
Firstly, provide tax-free incentives for young people to save for a house. Robert Colville writes in The Times that Brits with student loans are paying 50p in tax from every pound they earn over £50,000 and 71p over £100,000. Getting a deposit together is often hopeless for even top-earning graduates without help from the bank of mum and dad. Something like Singapore’s CPF would allow workers to save into a specific house-buying account. It need not be compulsory nor state managed. But it should be ring-fenced and explicitly linked to first-home purchase.
Secondly, remove uncertainty. Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority fixes land use, density and infrastructure expectations in advance. Builders operate within known limits. They don’t have to contend with Section 106-esque regulations that leave developers unsure if local housing associations will even buy the affordable housing they’re obligated to provide. Get things built first.
Finally, Britain needs to stop concerning itself with fringe measures that play only to the politics of envy. I recently went to an event at the Seven Palms complex on Singapore’s Sentosa island, an enclave of wealthy foreigners. It had the ghostly feel of many of London’s high-end developments, with owners mostly in absentia. We may criticise the atmosphere created by such projects but they’re incidental to the wider problem. It’s virtue signalling rather than serious policy.
Britain’s housing crisis is not unique amongst developed nations. But alongside an acute supply shortage, it faces weakening demand. If the most talented young people don’t believe there’s a realistic route to buying, they will leave. And house prices will fall anyway while the country gets poorer. Fixing things now may unsettle Conservative voters who sit on high paper valuations. But a reckoning will come anyway. Perhaps those free evenings out in Singapore will start to dwindle.
Singapore shows the benefits of a government that acts forcefully. Britain shows the consequences of a government that meanders – forcing risk onto developers, disincentivising building and earning, and pandering to NIMBYism. Noel Skelton’s property-owning democracy was once an inspiration to a young Lee Kuan Yew.
The Conservatives need to reclaim that legacy to feed aspiration rather than resentment.
Politics
Why Cola Tastes Different In Glass Bottles
Did you know cola is made with a kola nut? The ingredient, which is from Africa, is where the fizzy drink gets its caffeine from.
Of course, some cola brands keep the other parts of their recipe top-secret. But why do beverages made by the same company seem to taste different in a glass bottle, can, and plastic bottle?
Well, according to Rowland King, a director at the glass bottles supplier, Quality Bottles, there’s real science behind the difference.
Why does cola taste different in a glass bottle vs a can or plastic bottle?
First, there’s the chemistry of each material to consider.
“Glass is chemically inert and non-porous, which means it doesn’t react with the drink or absorb flavour compounds,” King said.
“That helps keep the taste exactly as intended from the moment it’s filled to the moment it’s opened”.
Some experts think the polymer lining of tinned fizzy drinks can lead to a milder taste, while it’s possible that acetaldehyde in plastic bottles could affect the flavour.
And carbonation (bubbles) matter, too, King added.
“Fizzy drinks rely on dissolved CO₂ for their bite and freshness. Over time, plastic is slightly permeable to gas, even when sealed.
“Glass isn’t, so carbonation is typically retained more consistently, which can noticeably affect the taste and how it feels to drink.”
The screw or crown caps commonly used on glass bottles provide a tighter seal, too, allowing less CO2 to escape.
“Bottle shape also comes into it,” King continued.
“A narrow bottleneck concentrates aroma and slows down how quickly the drink hits the palate. That subtly changes the flavour perception compared to drinking from a wide can opening or pouring into a cup.”
Then, there’s temperature to consider
I personally love an ice-cold can of diet cola – sometimes called a “fridge cigarette” – because I feel like it stays cooler and crisper than plastic bottles.
But King explained, “Glass bottles are thicker and tend to chill more evenly and stay cold a bit longer once removed from the fridge. Since temperature strongly affects flavour perception, that alone can make the drink seem more refreshing.”
Of course, companies try their hardest to make their product taste as consistent as possible across a range of containers, King stated.
But, he ended, “material science is material science. The container does make a difference, especially with carbonated drinks”.
Politics
The House Article | Britain needs a National Pier Service to save our seaside heritage

Grade II-listed Southport Pier, the oldest iron pier in the country (Alamy)
3 min read
Britain’s piers are more than Victorian seaside relics – they define the British coast and the communities that depend on them, driving tourism and underpinning local economies.
Both of us represent constituencies — Worthing West and Southport — where the state of our piers is a huge talking point for constituents.
There are currently 60 operational piers in the UK, down from 150 in the early 20th century. Sadly, last week Storm Ingrid’s 60mph winds destroyed Teignmouth’s famous Grand Pier overnight.
Other British seaside piers face a growing political crisis, with about 20 per cent at risk of being lost due to rising costs, climate change and maintenance issues. Many MPs – us included – are calling for a ‘National Pier Service’ or ‘National Piers Trust’ to manage, preserve and regenerate many of these iconic structures, which are vital to local, seasonal economies.
The benefits of such a model include economies of scale. Centralising key functions such as procurement and maintenance through bulk purchasing and shared contracts, deploying specialist expertise via a dedicated national team, and pooling insurance risks for better terms would reduce expenses and improve quality.
Commercial branding, marketing and events would attract more visitors and generate higher revenues. Centralised training and workforce development would enhance service quality and safety while minimising duplication. Collectively, these efficiencies would make limited public and charitable funding stretch further, enabling the preservation and revitalisation of more piers without placing more strain on local councils and communities.
Southport Pier is the second longest in the country and has a proud history. It closed in 2022 due to its condition, but thanks to £20m funding from central government, the pier is due to be repaired and reopened in 2027.
Worthing’s Grade II-listed art deco pier is a much-loved feature of the town for residents and visitors alike and was named UK Pier of the Year in 2019. Opened in 1862 and reconstructed in 1887 to mark the Jubilee of Queen Victoria, it survived almost complete collapse due to storm damage in 1913 and a huge fire 20 years later that could be seen as far away as Beachy Head. More recently, storm damage caused the pier to be closed for almost three months at the end of last year, during which Beccy supported the borough council’s extensive restoration work.
This month we saw DCMS announce that £1.5bn will be invested in cultural organisations over the next five years to restore national pride. The funding will protect and restore more than 1,000 arts venues, museums, libraries and heritage buildings across the country. The investment will tackle urgent capital needs, preserve local heritage, and provide accessible, no- or low-cost cultural experiences for families. We are campaigning to ensure piers are part of the funding.
This Labour government’s core mission is a decade of renewal, and Britain’s iconic piers are a national symbol of our identity – after 14 years of Tory mismanagement, they should be treated as such.
Coastal towns have long been left behind through the austerity of consecutive Conservative governments, but Labour is now working to tackle regional inequality.
To combine the history and aesthetic of piers with a modern regeneration of coastal economies, let’s invest in rebuilding and refurbishing these iconic British monuments.
Dr Beccy Cooper is the Labour MP for Worthing West and Patrick Hurley is the Labour MP for Southport
Politics
What to know about Trump’s $12 billion critical minerals strategy | Energy Pod
What to know about Trump’s $12 billion critical minerals strategy | Energy Pod
lead image
Politics
Zarah Sultana just showed how solidarity is done
Your Party MP Zarah Sultana has backed the Greens’ candidate Hannah Spencer in the Gorton and Denton by-election later this month. Sultana has also called for left unity and stressed the threat to Muslims posed by the far-right of which Reform UK is part:
The unelected interim leadership of Your Party has still not formalised local branches or ensured members have access to their own data. This should have been resolved months ago, allowing local members to democratically select a Your Party candidate for the upcoming Gorton & Denton by-election.
The candidate list is now published and it is clear that Hannah Spencer, a local plumber and trade unionist, is the strongest challenger to Labour and Reform. I am, therefore, giving my personal critical support to her and the Green Party in this by-election, and I urge others to do the same.
I have always been clear that the left is strongest when it is united. Our real opponents are not one another. They are Reform and the far-right. As a young Muslim woman, I understand viscerally what it would mean for the far-right to gain power in this country. This is not an abstract debate for me, nor the millions of people across the country whose safety would be directly affected.
That is why I want Your Party to become what it was founded to be: a mass working-class party that unites the left, provides a genuine socialist and anti-imperialist alternative, and prevents Nigel Farage and his cronies from ever getting the keys to Downing Street. Together, Your Party will be that vehicle.
Ultimately, defeating fascism must be our number one priority.
My statement on the Gorton & Denton by-election: pic.twitter.com/HSrgDf70h2
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) February 3, 2026
Sultana’s statement followed an “awful”, factional statement by the Your Party ‘Grassroots Left’ slate that she has backed. The statement attacks the Greens as ‘pro-capitalist, pro-NATO’ and says that the faction cannot “lend unconditional support” to Spencer.
Of course, no one asked them to or suggested that they should lend unconditional support to anyone. As Sultana pointed out, the far-right is an existential threat to Muslims and other minority groups and defeating fascism has to take priority over purism and posturing. The Workers Party has recognised this and announced it will not stand a candidate to allow support to concentrate behind Spencer to defeat the red, blue and teal Tories.
Zarah Sultana did the right thing by coming out with a clear statement of support. If the whole of Your Party does not galvanise to help the Greens win what is likely to be a tight election between them and the Farage fascists, shame on it.
Featured image via the Canary
Politics
Zack Polanski Accuses Nigel Farage Of Avoiding Debate
Farage said “if you pick a fight which a chimney sweep you get covered in soot” when asked whether he would take Polanski up on the offer.
It comes after the Green Party leader knocked back the chance of a debate with Reform policy chief Zia Yusuf.
Referring to Polanski’s support for drug legalisation, Farage added: “You know, he’s got a fan club. All the heroin smokers think he’s absolutely marvellous.”
But Polanski told HuffPost UK: “Farage is running scared – he doesn’t want to talk about Reform’s super-rich backers, their Russia links, their plans to strip rights away from working people and to introduce charges to use the NHS.”
The Greens are locked in a three-way battle with Reform and Labour in the crunch Gorton and Denton by-election, which takes place on February 26.
Polanski added: “Farage knows that in Gorton and Denton, Labour are out of the race and Hannah Spencer is coming for Reform.
“It’s no surprise Farage is hiding behind cheap jokes – he’s got nothing to gain and everything to lose from going up against someone willing to say it how it is.”
Politics
Starmer moves to BLOCK release of more dirt on Mandelson
In an appalling move, Keir Starmer has moved to block some of the dirt on Peter Mandelson from getting out. The reason given is as follows:
🚨 UPDATE: Keir Starmer has tabled an amendment to the Tory motion which would exempt “papers prejudicial to UK national security or international relations”
h/t @danbloom1 https://t.co/AxU5OVVOW5 pic.twitter.com/cc8Svb3zRK
— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) February 3, 2026
Broken trust
Of course, no one believes this is down to national security. After all, Starmer is the man who hired known paedophile associate Peter Mandelson in the first place. As such, it’s clear Starmer doesn’t have the UK’s interests in mind when he makes decisions.
No, everyone can see this for what it is; a last minute attempt for Starmer to save himself and his cronies from embarrassment (and potential criminal charges).
This video should come back to haunt him. Everyone on twitter knew. One journalist finally asked. Did he not bother to follow up? Did he not think he needed to? Did he know anyway? Starmer is as corrupt and dodgy as any of them and he needs to resignhttps://t.co/B5069DqFTP
— any other leader would be 20 points ahead (@anyotherleader1) February 4, 2026
This isn’t the only headache for Starmer, either, as Skwawkbox wrote for the Canary yesterday:
Keir Starmer has given evidence to the Met Police of Peter Mandelson leaking confidential government information to serial child rapist – and Mandelson’s bestie – Jeffrey Epstein. The evidence includes original emails containing sensitive economic information. The emails released by the US justice department also show Mandelson engaging in insider trading that would enrich Epstein and his allies.
Now Starmer has. But his Downing Street officials – and therefore Starmer – were aware of Mandelson’s emails to Epstein months before now, probably even longer.
And as people are pointing out, Mandelson’s Epstein friendship is far from the only unseemly connection between Labour and total depravity:
Labour MP Dan Norris sat on the board of the Snowdon Trust, which supports disabled students, + the Kidscape child safety charity.
He co-wrote “Don’t Bully Me”, advising school children on how to deal with abuse.
He even launched a booklet to educate parents about paedophiles. pic.twitter.com/kn1wrDwonv
— Jody McIntyre (@jodymcintyre_) February 3, 2026
The emails keep coming too, including this exchange which shines a light on the relationship between Mandelson and Epstein (read the below email first):
A defining feature of the Labour right is that they are *desperate* moochers – from the Blairs taking free clothes from Paul Smith, to Starmer’s suits and glasses and Taylor Swift tickets, to Mandelson exhausting the patience of the world’s most prolific sex offender pic.twitter.com/MslTOv5ZSV
— Nicholas Guyatt (@NicholasGuyatt) February 3, 2026
What’s clear from this is that Mandelson was desperate for Epstein’s attention; Epstein, meanwhile, clearly just saw Mandelson as a pawn in his international power games. This is clearly why the pathetic Mandelson ended up sending him British state secrets.
What sort of man betrays his country to encourage the affections of a paedophile?
Justice at last?
Many – including the Canary – were speaking out against Mandelson and Starmer long before these latest revelations:
Peter Mandelson, now Starmer’s Ambassador to the USA, with Jeffrey Epstein.
I was sacked as Ambassador for opposing torture and illegal rendition.
The worlid of power is a dark place indeed. pic.twitter.com/PJG4Byfh21— Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) September 9, 2025
We published this about Peter Mandelson 4 yrs ago
Whilst Keir Starmer was being advised by Mandelson & the media invited him on their shows
Thanks to the lack of media scrutiny Starmer felt emboldened to appoint him Ambassador to US
The media & government do not work for you pic.twitter.com/itEhIw4LG5
— Double Down News (@DoubleDownNews) February 3, 2026
Mandelson has been sacked; pressured to resign from Labour, and bullied into stepping down from the lords. But this isn’t enough.
He must face criminal consequences for leaking British state secrets to Epstein, with a full investigation into whatever else the pair got up to.
Further than that, Starmer must answer for what he knew, and for how this sorry affair came to pass.
Featured image via Number 10
Politics
Jason Bateman Faces Backlash Over Charli XCX Interview Questions
Jason Bateman is facing criticism over his line of questioning during a recent interview with Charli XCX.
The Ozark actor co-hosts the podcast SmartLess with Sean Hayes and Will Arnett, where each week a member of the team will introduce a surprise celebrity guest to the other two co-presenters, who they then proceed to interview.
During the latest episode of the Golden Globe-nominated interview series, the celebrity guest was Charli XCX, and as the hour-long conversation progressed, the Grammy winner, who is an only child, was asked if that’s something she’d want for her own future children.
“I actually don’t really want to have kids,” the 360 singer responded. “So…”
She was then pressed on why, to which she admitted her stance “could change” in the future, with Sean Hayes interjecting: “Oh, that’s none of my business.”
Charli continued: “It’s like – I love the fantasy of having a child. Like, naming it… sounds so fun. But that is exactly a sign for me as to why I should not have one. The fact that that feels like the coolest part about it, maybe I’m not ready, you know what I mean?”
Jason then told her: “You know, all that could change… I’m sort of backing into giving myself a half-assed compliment here, but my wife did not want to have kids, so the story goes, so she tells it.
“And she said once we started going out, and she met [me], she was like, ‘OK I think I could have a kid with this guy’. So you might find somebody…”
“Well, I’m married,” Charli then pointed out, having tied the knot with fellow musician George Daniel in 2025.
Charli then added that she “knew” where Jason was going with his line of questioning and was “looking forward” to pointing out that she’s now married, to which he quipped: “Maybe with your next husband you’re going to want kids.”
Since the episode began airing, many have been voicing their disappointment with Jason for raising such a personal and sensitive topic in a public setting, as well as for telling Charli she could change her mind after her statement about probably not wanting children…
HuffPost UK has contacted Jason Bateman’s team for comment.
Charli previously sang about her complex feelings about potentially having children in the future on the song I Think About It All The Time, featured on her Grammy-winning album Brat.
She previously said during a 2024 interview with Rolling Stone: “Am I less of a woman if I don’t have a kid? Will I feel like I’ve missed out on my purpose in life? I know we’re not supposed to say that, but it’s this biological and social programming.
“There’s a lot of pressure on women to not talk about that stuff super openly, especially not in pop music or in music generally; we’re supposed to be sexy and free and fun and wild.”
-
Crypto World5 days agoSmart energy pays enters the US market, targeting scalable financial infrastructure
-
Crypto World6 days ago
Software stocks enter bear market on AI disruption fear with ServiceNow plunging 10%
-
Politics5 days agoWhy is the NHS registering babies as ‘theybies’?
-
Crypto World5 days agoAdam Back says Liquid BTC is collateralized after dashboard problem
-
Video1 day agoWhen Money Enters #motivation #mindset #selfimprovement
-
Tech3 hours agoWikipedia volunteers spent years cataloging AI tells. Now there’s a plugin to avoid them.
-
NewsBeat5 days agoDonald Trump Criticises Keir Starmer Over China Discussions
-
Politics2 days agoSky News Presenter Criticises Lord Mandelson As Greedy And Duplicitous
-
Crypto World4 days agoU.S. government enters partial shutdown, here’s how it impacts bitcoin and ether
-
Sports4 days agoSinner battles Australian Open heat to enter last 16, injured Osaka pulls out
-
Fashion5 days agoWeekend Open Thread – Corporette.com
-
Crypto World4 days agoBitcoin Drops Below $80K, But New Buyers are Entering the Market
-
Crypto World2 days agoMarket Analysis: GBP/USD Retreats From Highs As EUR/GBP Enters Holding Pattern
-
Crypto World5 days agoKuCoin CEO on MiCA, Europe entering new era of compliance
-
Business5 days ago
Entergy declares quarterly dividend of $0.64 per share
-
Sports2 days agoShannon Birchard enters Canadian curling history with sixth Scotties title
-
NewsBeat1 day agoUS-brokered Russia-Ukraine talks are resuming this week
-
NewsBeat2 days agoGAME to close all standalone stores in the UK after it enters administration
-
Crypto World12 hours agoRussia’s Largest Bitcoin Miner BitRiver Enters Bankruptcy Proceedings: Report
-
Crypto World5 days agoWhy AI Agents Will Replace DeFi Dashboards
