The battle to become the country’s next progressive leader in the mold of Bernie Sanders is heating up ahead of Democrats’ direction-defining Michigan Senate primary.

Nowhere is the jockeying and strategy unfolding behind the scenes more pronounced than between Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ro Khanna of California, who have taken disparate approaches to the midterms as they build out their political brands. Khanna’s go-everywhere mentality versus Ocasio-Cortez’s more selective involvement in key races this cycle will test their political acumen and relationships, potentially setting them up for a 2028 presidential race that could decide who will inherit the movement.

In much of Sanders’ inner circle, who comes next is pretty obvious, even as the wider progressive movement continues to clash over the answer.

“It’s always been clear that AOC is the heir,” one person close to Sanders who’s been involved in such conversations with him for years, granted anonymity to share their understanding of the private discussions. “Always.”

Yet within the broader Sanders coalition, there is plenty of behind-the-scenes posturing — and outright bickering — over who will ultimately take over for the Vermont senator. Khanna’s allies say Ocasio-Cortez is playing it too safe to be the next standard-bearer, with some prominent left-wing leaders irked by her sparing endorsement strategy.

Ocasio-Cortez’s and Khanna’s diverging paths are on full display in Michigan, where Democrats’ most contentious Senate primary is coming to a head Tuesday in a critical battleground that will have outsized importance in selecting Democrats’ next presidential nominee.

Both representatives and Sanders have backed Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive former public health official who has surged in polls against establishment-backed Rep. Haley Stevens as he consolidates support among the left.

But only Ocasio-Cortez has appeared alongside Sanders in stumping for El-Sayed, with the two holding a joint rally in Lansing, Michigan, last month. Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders are featured prominently in one of El-Sayed’s closing television ads, in a key sign of who the campaign thinks can best help push him over the finish line.

Khanna, meanwhile, cut a separate digital fundraising appeal for El-Sayed and has campaigned for him without Sanders.

Sanders and Khanna do maintain a relationship — the California representative was a national co-chair of Sanders’ 2020 presidential bid — but there’s doubt within the Vermont independent’s orbit over how successful a Khanna presidential run would be or whether he’s best positioned to inherit the progressive throne, should Ocasio-Cortez choose not to run for president in 2028.

“Ro is basically already running, but not many are taking him too seriously as the movement’s next leader,” said another operative close to Sanders, granted anonymity to speak candidly.

In an interview, Khanna brushed off the notion that there’s a single heir to the Vermont senator’s progressive movement. “I believe that Sanders is going to have many successors over decades, and the key is to build a majoritarian progressivism that can win across the country,” he said.

Asked whether an Ocasio-Cortez presidential bid would change his calculus, he answered flatly: “No.” His decision, he says, will come “around Thanksgiving.”

A representative for Ocasio-Cortez declined to comment. Sanders, for his part, is trying to rise above the jockeying.

“The presidential election is in 2 years and 3 months,” Sanders said in a statement. “Let’s focus now on how we resolve the urgent issues facing our country. There is plenty of time to worry about possible presidential candidates.”

Why Sanders world sees AOC as the successor

Sanders, 84, and Ocasio-Cortez, 36, share a deeply personal bond their advisers say transcends politics but remains rooted in their shared ideals. They talk directly about key policy, political ideas and candidates to boost, and they even coordinated their endorsements around a group of New York democratic socialists and progressives who ultimately won House seats.

The two also share a circle of advisers, including Faiz Shakir and Mike Casca. Casca, a former long-time Sanders aide, now serves as Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff and plays a major role in shaping policy and political strategy. Shakir is an adviser to Sanders and executive director of More Perfect Union, a progressive nonprofit media organization.

“I’m sure there are a lot of people who are interested in being the next Bernie Sanders, I think he’d be less inclined to give them his endorsement” over Ocasio-Cortez, said a third person close to Sanders, who’s been involved in the conversations around his political and policy strategy for years, granted anonymity to discuss them.

Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have approached the midterms differently. The Vermont independent has worked to expand his endorsement roster and his presence on the campaign trail this year, which his allies see as an effort to cultivate a lasting generation of progressive leaders to carry on his movement. He often endorses early, acting as a validator for left-leaning candidates’ campaigns and platforms, while Ocasio-Cortez has been serving as more of a closer.

It’s a strategic shift for the New York Democrat, who used to get involved in races earlier — a calculus advisers say is a recognition of her ability to mobilize certain voting blocs, like communities of color and working-class voters, late in the game.

They don’t coordinate on every contest, but they have joined forces in several races — including El-Sayed’s Michigan Senate race and Sam Forstag’s House primary in Montana. Ocasio-Cortez called Sanders as soon as she decided to endorse El-Sayed and they immediately began planning a rally for him, according to a person familiar with the discussions and granted anonymity to describe the private conversations.

Earlier this year, Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez together also developed the leading progressive push to address artificial intelligence. Sanders was the first member of Congress to call for an AI moratorium, and he helped shape Ocasio-Cortez’s stance. The pair unveiled joint legislation in March to ban the rapid build up of data center construction.

Months later, the issue is now cutting across progressive and conservative voting blocs, is a preeminent policy issue on Capitol Hill and is at the heart of dozens of midterm races and even early 2028 presidential talk.

“Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and I understand what is at stake,” Sanders said as he introduced the AI moratorium bill alongside the New York Democrat this spring in the Senate.

Progressive candidates whose campaigns have received nods from both Ocasio-Cortez and Khanna say they are both key validators who carry different appeal.

Khanna has risen in prominence because of his push to release files on Jeffrey Epstein. And Ocasio-Cortez brings the kind of star power and nationalized spotlight that campaigns say is invaluable for growing candidates’ exposure, particularly among younger progressive voters who can be trickier to turn out.

“AOC’s very popular, she has a lot of grassroots support … all across the country,” said Adam Hamawy, who was endorsed by both representatives in his New Jersey House primary this spring. “Ro Khanna has not just progressives, but he’s had a strong stance against corruption. … There’s a lot of overlap but each of them have specific things that come together to paint a wider picture than if I just had one.”

Don’t count Ro out yet

Not everyone around Sanders is sold on Ocasio-Cortez as the heir apparent. Khanna allies argue he’s the one who has been putting in the work — and sticking his neck out for the progressive movement — by backing primary challengers to incumbents, getting out front on issues like the Epstein files, and recently traveling to the West Bank.

“People who are supporting her are supporting her more as a brand,” said one Khanna ally and Sanders world operative, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. “What does it mean to work with her? What does it mean for her to pass a bill? I don’t know her theory of change.”

There is fear Ocasio-Cortez is “weirdly isolating herself” over the years ahead of a 2028 decision, the operative added. “I could not tell you who AOC’s advisers are at this point [beyond Casca]. If you’re thinking of running for president, you want to be in an expansive, elevated, exciting space, not in a controlled environment.”

Ocasio-Cortez has been significantly more selective in her endorsements than either Khanna or Sanders, backing left-wing candidates across several competitive House primaries but steering clear of some of the messiest contests on the map, including Maine Senate and Wisconsin’s imploding gubernatorial primary.

That approach has drawn consternation from some on the left who say she’s playing it too safe given her political cachet, particularly as she declines to join other progressives in endorsing against incumbents — notably in her own backyard — even though that’s how she won her seat in 2018.

“Who cares about your win-loss ratio? What I care about is, are you trying to help fellow progressives or aren’t you?” said Cenk Uygur, a Khanna supporter who founded the progressive online network “The Young Turks” and Justice Democrats.

“AOC cares so much about her colleagues, and her colleagues are establishment Democrats. I don’t care about them. In fact, I’m opposed to them,” Uygur added. “I want them challenged in primaries.”

Khanna has worked to keep his own close ties to Sanders and his circle.

Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ 2016 campaign manager, now serves as a senior adviser to Khanna as he’s pushing to be a high-profile progressive leader and laying the framework for a possible 2028 presidential run.

“No two candidates are equal,” Weaver said. “But I think Ro Khanna has the chance to do what Bernie did, which is to have appeal beyond the Democratic base.”

Khanna has spent years trying to build the kind of early-state infrastructure a presidential campaign requires, traveling to early primary and battleground states to lay the organizational groundwork for a potential run. Since 2021, he has been working to assemble steering committees of 75 to 100 people in New Hampshire and Nevada, with another being built in South Carolina, while working with local political power players, according to Shannon Jackson, another longtime Sanders operative who is now consulting for Khanna.

Over the last week, the California representative has been on what he is calling an “new economic patriotism tour” through Pennsylvania, holding events in counties Trump carried like Erie, Luzerne and Cambria “There is a great desire for a bold, progressive vision that is going to call out an unfair and rigged political and economic system,” he told POLITICO. But the test, Khanna argued, is making that vision work “not just in the Bay Area, not just in Michigan, not just in progressive areas, but in places like Pennsylvania.”

Khanna has endorsed dozens of candidates up and down the ballot this year, wading into some of the most fraught Democratic House, Senate and gubernatorial primaries in the country.

That widespread involvement has produced a mixed track record with some high-profile losses, including Graham Platner’s disgraced exit from Maine’s Senate primary and Tom Steyer’s expensive loss in the California governor’s race. In the case of Platner, Khanna and Sanders endorsed the Maine progressive, while Ocasio-Cortez, notably, stayed out of the race altogether.

Khanna also has backed candidates against the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and establishment. For example, Khanna-endorsed progressive Matt Dunlap in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District successfully defeated the DCCC’s preferred candidate.

“There’s a difference between being a progressive in policies and being a progressive in action,” said Uygur. “And action requires you challenging the system, challenging the establishment. On those grounds, it’s not close. Ro Khanna is head and shoulders above every other Democrat.”

Source link

An Israeli has tried to get a Burger King employee in Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, sacked for saying “Free Palestine”.

In classic ‘always the victim’ fashion, Rami Feinstein filmed employees, then demanded to know from the food chain:

Are you a safe place for Jews right now?

The company said it is investigating the ‘incident’.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by PAL GLOBAL ECHO (@pal.global.echo)

Always the… you know the rest

The video sent the Israel lobby into apoplexy as it tried – of course – to cast Israelis as, you’ve guessed it, the victims.

Notwithstanding issues with US food production, Jews are safe in fast food chains – unlike Palestinians trying to eat amid Israel’s starvation siege of Gaza, where they are likely to be bombed or shot.

Solidarity with Ariana at Breinigsville Burger King. If the company has any spine and principles, she’ll be promoted.

Featured image via Instagram

By Skwawkbox

Source link

On Saturday 1 August, Donald Trump’s Truth Social launched a subscription-based service that gives paying customers “real-time” access to posts from its largest accounts. The social media platform is charging up to $100,000 a month for what it calls “market-moving” insights.

Critics have called the move an act of “brazen corruption”. Trump, a sitting US president, stands to profit by giving traders early access to the Truth Social posts. Those same traders could then profit from acting on subsequent changes in bonds, interest rates and stock prices.

‘Market-moving Truths’

Trump holds majority ownership of Truth Social via Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. He also happens to be the platform’s most significant user, with nearly 13 million followers. The president frequently posts major policy decisions on the site, often with profound implications for global markets.

Truth Social is calling its new feature ‘Truth API’ (i.e., application programming interface). Interim CEO Kevin McGurn stated that it provides:

a direct, licensed, real-time feed of the platform’s most market-moving Truths.

Trump’s often posts news of his administration to the platform before making it public elsewhere. Particularly when his posts have related to the war on Iran or tariffs, they’ve cause massive fluctuations in markets around the world.

‘Outrageous abuse of the President’s office’

On Tuesday 28 July, Democratic senators Adam Schiff and Elizabeth Warren requested that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) examine the service. In a letter to the SEC boss Paul Atkins, the two wrote:

This appears to be an outrageous abuse of the President’s office for his personal benefit that undermines everyday investors and the integrity of our markets, while enriching Wall Street and other wealthy insiders.

The senators are far from the only figures to highlight Trump’s corruption. Financial journalist James Surowiecki voiced his belief that the feature violates insider trading laws. He explained:

Trump is disclosing information (in this case, information about some of his future public statements as president, including statements about policy) that belongs to the US government in exchange for money. That violates his duty of trust and confidence to his employer (the govt), and is illegal. And anyone who pays for the feed is knowingly paying for misappropriated information, which is illegal as well.

Professor Kathleen Clark, of the Washington School of Law, said:

He’s selling expedited, privileged access to information about what he is doing as president. It’s yet more brazen corruption, an improper exploitation of government power to enrich himself.

Dean Baker, one of the founders of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, stated that:

the money that insider traders pocket is money taken from the 401(k)s and IRAs of normal people who work for a living.

Trump’s profiteering presidency

Of course, this level of profiteering and (alleged) corruption is hardly new for Trump’s presidency. On 15 July, Forbes reported that Trump:

took in $2.4 billion last year, according to a Forbes analysis, which overlayed his financial disclosure report with bond filings, securities documents and court records to pinpoint a more specific number than the “at least $2.2 billion” widely reported in recent weeks. The $2.4 billion figure, a combination of operating revenue and proceeds from asset sales, dwarfs the estimated $760 million Trump received in 2024. It is also 6,000 times the current U.S. presidential salary of $400,000.

The business magazine also stated that Trump Media shares rose 5.5%, landing at $10.39 just before closing. Since Trump’s return to office in 2025, shares in Trump Media plummeted by over 70%, equating to a loss of around $6bn for its shareholders.

Featured image via Britannica

By Grace

Source link

Cori Bush’s 2024 primary loss to Wesley Bell was heralded as a major defeat for the insurgent progressive movement.

Now, their rematch for Missouri’s 1st District two years later comes at a time when Bush and her allies seem to be winning the battle for the future of the Democratic Party.

The dueling factions in St. Louis highlight the growing tension over not just the domestic ideological divide in the Democratic Party, but the party’s — and country’s — stance on the U.S.’s longrunning relationship with Israel.

The former representative was among the first sitting members of Congress to call Israel’s actions in Gaza a “genocide” — and now she’s betting that her progressive bonafides and her criticism of the top U.S. ally will boost her to victory with the same electorate that punished her last cycle.

“One of us is of the people, by the people and for the people,” Bush said in a recent interview. “The other one is paid for by AIPAC. That’s the difference.”

Like two years ago, a group aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the largest outside spender in the race. The organization’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has spent at least $2.1 million on advertising in the primary, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact.

Roughly half of all adults who identify as Democrats believe that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians, according to a July AP-NORC poll, an accusation that some human rights organizations have made but both the Israeli and American governments strongly deny.

And from Colorado to New York, several progressives have already tapped into voters’ frustrations with party leadership and successfully wielded their criticism of Israel’s government in order to win.

St. Louis is only one of several races on Tuesday testing the Democratic Party’s establishment: voters will also hit the polls in Michigan to cast their ballots for the progressive, Abdul El-Sayed, or the moderate Rep. Haley Stevens for an open Senate seat.

That race has also become a check for voters’ opposition to AIPAC. And some potential 2028 Democratic contenders have already sworn off accepting funding from AIPAC, another sign of the growing unwillingness to be aligned with the organization.

AIPAC and some Democrats have hit back, saying its critics within the Democratic Party have increasingly made the party inhospitable to those generally supportive of Israel.

In response to requests for comment, AIPAC shared a series of ads knocking Bush for her missed votes and her criticism of the Biden administration and former Vice President Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential bid. (In a recent debate, Bush claimed Bell delayed his endorsement of Harris, but both endorsed the former vice president on July 21, 2024, the same day she announced her candidacy.)

Bell unseated Bush two years ago with heavy financial backing from AIPAC, the country’s preeminent pro-Israel lobby. They’ve once again spent heavily on his behalf, and this time, he also comes into the race with establishment support — including endorsements from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Congressional Black Caucus PAC.

Bell and his allies have absolutely swamped Bush on the airwaves this year. In addition to UDP’s $2.1 million in ad spending, Bell’s campaign has followed closely behind at over $2 million, according to AdImpact, with over $700,000 more from another super PAC called New Democrat Majority.

Bush, meanwhile, has spent less than $200,000, according to the ad tracker. She boasts the backing of a progressive coalition that includes the Democratic Socialists of America, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and fellow “Squad” member Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.).

Bell has brushed aside the attacks that he’s being bolstered by AIPAC money.

“I think we all can agree that there’s too much money in politics, and I’m a vocal and public supporter of campaign finance reform,” Bell said in an interview. “What I’m not a fan of or a supporter of is singling out certain Americans and saying that they should not participate in our democratic process. That is where I would absolutely draw the line.”

Bell added that the difference between himself and Bush is that he can offer both support and criticism of allies.

“While I’m not the biggest fan of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu], I still believe that we have to stand with our allies,” Bell said. “That doesn’t mean we’re not going to disagree at times with our allies.”

Bell’s and Bush’s showdown in 2024 was arguably the biggest ideological battlefield for the party that year, outside of the discontent surrounding Biden and then Harris’ presidential bids from progressives critical of Israel.

But two years later, it is just one of many fights that has sprawled across the country. Progressive candidates have been racking up primary victories against establishment figures in a trend that some are calling the “Mamdani effect” after democratic socialist New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani took down Andrew Cuomo in both the 2025 primary and general elections.

Still, this year’s St. Louis rematch isn’t quite the marquee fight it was in 2024. Spending has trended down: Collectively nearly $20 million was dropped on the 2024 contest on advertising, according to AdImpact. That’s roughly four times more than this year’s total.

Usamah Andrabi, spokesperson for Justice Democrats, the progressive group that endorsed Bush earlier this cycle, attributed the broader, nationwide ideological fight to a base that has been “pushed to the edge of desperation by the Democratic Party itself.”

“The Democratic Party’s base woke up in January 2025 realizing that their party’s establishment was unfit, unprepared and frankly unwilling to fight back against Donald Trump and Republican extremists with the urgency the moment demanded,” Andrabi said.

Now, as St. Louis voters head to the polls on Tuesday, Bush cast the eventual outcome in dire terms.

“What is at stake,” Bush said, “is the affordability and the peace of every single person in this country.”

Source link

Brothers Andrew and Tristan Tate are facing extradition to the UK over alleged sexual offences, trafficking and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

As the Canary has covered, the pair’s lawyer has been behaving in disturbing and erratic ways in his efforts to defend them. This has now seen him spreading misinformation about the Tates’ alleged victims.

Andrew Tate's lawyer keeps repeating lies about Tate's alleged victims in the UK being caught "planning to extort Tate."

There is no evidence of this. This is an old Tate propaganda talking point from 2023 that he is digging up. pic.twitter.com/ENrIdF6v6N

Advertisement

— Gadget (@Gadget440) August 3, 2026

Tate brothers await extradition proceedings to the UK

The lawyer in question is Joseph McBride, who recently said:

Even if you accept all the allegations against them is true, the amount of good they’ve done for the world tremendously outweighs the bad.

On the allegations in question, the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service announced:

The CPS has decided to prosecute Andrew Tate, 39, with seven further counts of rape, three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and 19 additional charges for offences relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography.

The CPS has decided to prosecute Tristan Tate, 38, with one count of sexual assault, two counts of rape and three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation.

In the video at the top, McBride says:

And the thing is, there’s a pattern that’s been going on for years. In England, they were accused of [sexual assault] a long time ago. And in England, when you’re accused of [sexual assault], the government will take the phones of the accusers as evidence. So they went through the girls’ phones and they found, basically, let’s extort Andrew Tate. And they declined to prosecute. They closed the case.

As journalist and YouTuber Gadget noted, however, there are multiple problems with this.

‘Tate propaganda’

The first problem is the voice note McBride is referencing. In it, the alleged victims discussed whether or not they should share the fact that Andrew Tate provided them with alcohol. The women were worried that if they did share this information, the police would use the fact that they were drinking to discredit them. According to Gadget, “This is what ended up happening”.

The second problem is that the women from the voice note have nothing to do with the alleged crimes the Tates may be extradited over. This is a pretty massive thing to be aware of, obviously.

Gadget also noted:

When McBride says they “tossed the case,” he is omitting some important context.

Earlier this year, Hertfordshire Police re-opened their criminal investigation into these allegations against Tate which had previously been “tossed.” And the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) launched an investigation into the conduct of the detectives behind the initial botched investigation.

Again, these four women are reportedly separate to the seven connected to the current charges for which the Tates are facing extradition to the UK.

Advertisement

Whether McBride likes it or not, his clients have a case to answer in the UK. He clearly seems to be worried about this too. If he wasn’t, he wouldn’t be relying on slander and misinformation.

Featured image via Associated Press/ Vadim Ghirda

By Willem Moore

Source link

Unloading aggregate for the Southern Trench Interim Membrane project

If the UK is to deliver a new generation of nuclear power, strengthen energy security and support clean growth, it must also answer a fundamental question often asked in Parliament. How do we manage radioactive waste safely, securely and responsibly for the long term?

Advertisement

At Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), that question sits at the heart of everything we do. On the West Cumbrian coast, between the Lake District fells and the rugged west coast of Cumbria, the UK’s Low Level Waste Repository has been performing a nationally significant role for more than six decades.

Since 1959, it has supported the safe disposal of around one million cubic metres of low-level radioactive waste, protecting people, the environment and the future of the UK’s nuclear programme.

With Government recognising new nuclear as a cornerstone to help grow the economy with clean energy, the ability to manage radioactive waste safely now and in the future is key.

 

Advertisement

Making waste permanently safe, sooner

NWS is part of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) group whose mission is to decommission the UK’s nuclear sites safely, securely, and responsibly, taking care of the environment and the communities living and working near its sites. Our work provides the endpoint in the nuclear journey and is critical to the NDA’s mission.

Bringing together the UK’s expertise in radioactive waste management to drive our mission of making waste permanently safe, sooner, we’re tackling the legacy of decades of waste from civil and defence sector activities, while also preparing for the waste that will arise from new nuclear as part of the government’s ‘golden age of nuclear’.

Advertisement

Every decision our team makes is focused on the safe, secure, and permanent disposal of nuclear waste. And as a nuclear licensed site, our work at the Repository is underpinned by a comprehensive and robust Environmental Safety Case (ESC), which addresses environmental safety during operations and over timescales extending to thousands of years. 

Long-term protection – capping the site

Disposing of low-level radioactive waste is a long-term mission, and we’re now carrying out important work on the final capping of the site which will eventually lead to the permanent closure of the legacy disposal trenches and vaults.

Capping is a key part of the disposal lifecycle and involves placing an engineered protective barrier over the trenches and vaults, where waste is already in its final disposal location and ready for permanent closure.

Comprising of layers of material, totalling up to 10m thick, this ‘cap’ will permanently protect the waste, people and the environment by layering natural aggregates, as well as engineered materials. Installed to the highest engineering standards, the multi-layered cap reflects our commitment to quality, durability and long-term environmental protection.

Advertisement

As part of our preparatory works for capping, we’re currently completing our Southern Trench Interim Membrane (STIM) project, which involves replacing the protective membrane (liner) over the southern part of our legacy waste disposal trenches that require a new, robust cover to withstand changing weather patterns.

A key component of the four-year STIM contract is collaboration with Nuclear Transport Solutions’ rail division, Direct Rail Services (part of the NDA group) with each train making the journey from Shap quarry to the Repository to deliver over 750 tonnes of aggregate to the Repository site – the equivalent of 36 HGVs. In total, more than 300,000 tonnes of aggregate will be delivered to the site between February 2025 and August 2026. As of 10 July 2026, 325 trains have transported over 285,000 tonnes of aggregate, and by using rail instead of road, we’ve avoided more than 15,000 HGV journeys. This reduces traffic and minimises disruption for the local community, which is important to us. This is an example of how the NDA group model is facilitating collaboration across operating companies to manage the UK nuclear legacy safely, securely and sustainably. We’re making great progress with this work which will see the interim liner remain in place for up to 100 years.

Rail deliveries are currently scheduled for completion in mid-August 2026. The STIM works are due to be completed in 2028 and the procurement process for the next phase of capping is now under way, which will provide comprehensive construction and design services over a 10-year framework.

Repository capping is one of our key projects and fulfils key requirements from our ESC and obligations under our site permit.

Advertisement

Diverting waste to protect capacity

The Repository site receives waste from a range of customers such as the nuclear industry, the Ministry of Defence, non-nuclear sectors such as educational, medical and research, where alternative treatment or disposal routes are not suitable. 

NWS helps to drive sustainable waste management for the UK nuclear industry by applying the waste hierarchy – avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle and only dispose as a last resort.

By re-using or recycling where possible, we now divert 98% of waste away from disposal at the Repository site protecting constrained national capacity and improving efficiency.

Community and environment

Advertisement

We have a responsibility to be a ‘good neighbour’ and reduce the impact of operations on our Repository site community where possible. Any potential impacts are always a key consideration when planning our activities and operations.  

Neighbouring a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), the Repository site is ecologically rich and sensitive. We host a range of species including roe deer, great-crested newts, badgers and pipistrelle bats.

Ecology on a site like ours is about both protection and improvement. It means surveying species, understanding how they use the land, and taking decisions that avoid unnecessary disturbance. It also means creating new opportunities for wildlife to thrive. 

So, while nuclear waste management is about ensuring we meet our safety and legal obligations first and foremost, it’s also about working alongside our local community and caring for the environment.

Advertisement

Source link

4 min read12 min

Dignity at the end of life cannot depend on whether a clinician knows about the relevant form or a family has the strength to keep chasing help.

Advertisement

When someone is living with a terminal illness, time becomes particularly precious. Their final weeks and days should be spent in dignity and comfort, with the people they love, not lost to paperwork and phone calls proving they are ill enough to receive essential benefits.

As Andy Burnham puts social care reform back at the centre of Westminster debate, he is right that palliative and end-of-life care urgently need fixing. The government’s promised Modern Service Framework for Palliative and End of Life Care should set out how the NHS delivers the right care, in the right place and at the right time. This ambition must include financial security, because people cannot die with dignity if they cannot afford to live safely and comfortably.

The Special Rules for End of Life are designed to give dying people quicker access to benefits without unnecessary assessments or delays. A terminal diagnosis can bring an income shock, as people may have to leave work while facing higher household costs, including heating and medical equipment. Fast-tracked benefits can help families to manage those pressures and support people to remain safely at home for as long as possible.

Advertisement

Yet the Special Rules are still failing to reach too many people they are supposed to protect. Research funded by Marie Curie and led by King’s College London found that, in England and Wales, more than one in three people who died from a chronic illness did not receive the disability benefits they were eligible for through this route, around 120,000 people each year. With more than 100,000 people dying in poverty annually across the UK, this cannot be dismissed as a narrow benefits problem. It is a moral failure spanning health, social care and welfare policy.

The research also helps to explain why people are missing out. Interviews with patients, carers and healthcare professionals found that uncertainty around prognosis and low awareness of the Special Rules can delay access, while discomfort discussing money and difficulties completing the relevant forms create further barriers.

For families already facing an extremely difficult time, missing out can mean being unable to heat their home or afford transport to appointments. It can make receiving care safely at home harder, even when that is where someone would like to be, while carers may feel forced to choose between taking time off work and paying household bills.

These problems are solvable, but they require coordinated action. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) should work with the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS to make the Special Rules easier to understand and use. This should include raising awareness among clinicians, providing clearer guidance on Special Rules forms and embedding questions about financial hardship and eligibility into advance care planning, hospital discharge planning and GP palliative care registers, so people are offered help before reaching crisis point. The DWP should also collect better data on who completes the forms, consider expanding the group of approved clinicians who can confirm eligibility, such as hospice paramedics, and allow completion to be delegated once eligibility has been confirmed.

Advertisement

Ministers should also review the 12-month prognosis requirement used in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Prognosis can be uncertain, particularly for conditions with less predictable trajectories, such as heart failure or HIV, both of which are linked to lower take-up under the Special Rules. Scotland has moved to a more flexible model without a fixed time limit, and the DWP should examine what can be learned from that approach.

Everyone deserves a good death, and dignity at the end of life cannot depend on whether a clinician knows about the relevant form or a family has the strength to keep chasing help. The government has accepted that terminally ill people should receive fast-tracked benefits; it must now deliver on that commitment before financial hardship adds to the distress of their final days.

 

Dr Sam Royston Executive Director of Research and Policy at Marie Curie 

Advertisement

Source link

Source link

It’s easy to assume that the theatre is a world of glitz and glamour. A place where performers have their names in lights and live lives of luxury.

But many theatre workers face the same challenges common across all sectors. Unpredictable hours and pay, difficulty achieving work-life balance, a general sense of precarity.

Performers and other staff in the Equity union have been pushing for an improvement in their terms. And they’ve already had success.

A new deal for theatre workers

Equity members have voted to ratify a new three-year agreement with the Society of London Theatre (SOLT). It covers pay and conditions for performers and stage management working in the West End.

The agreement runs from April 2026 to April 2029. It got approval from 98% of members voting, on a turnout of 75%.

Under the agreement, minimum rates will rise by at least 13.5% over three years. It also improves holiday entitlement and family leave, supports better work-life balance, strengthens equality and inclusion provisions, and recognises additional responsibilities.

Alongside improved notice and scheduling guarantees for theatre performers and stage management, the agreement provides producers and managers with more modern scheduling arrangements, simplifies tour planning, and gives both sides greater certainty over its three-year term.

SOLT and Equity thank the members of their respective negotiating committees, and all those who contributed to reaching the agreement.

Paul W Fleming, general secretary of Equity, said:

For over a decade, Equity has sought to increase annual leave, reduce rehearsal weeks, and improve work-life balance on the West End.

Not only does this agreement achieve these objectives for the first time, but it also lifts minimum pay to a record high in real terms.

We’re encouraged by SOLT’s stated aspiration to use this agreement as a starting point for more regular high-level exchanges on terms and conditions. There is no reason this cannot be the start of modern terms and conditions, and the beginning of the end of low pay on the West End.

Hannah Essex, co-chief executive of the Society of London Theatre, said:

This agreement delivers meaningful improvements to pay and working conditions, strengthens work-life balance, and gives the West End a clear and stable framework through to 2029.

It represents a significant commitment from producers at a time when costs are rising faster than inflation and higher employers’ National Insurance contributions are compounding the strain on theatres.

Even as average ticket prices remain below pre-pandemic levels in real terms, theatres have once again been excluded from targeted business rates relief.

Government must now recognise the cumulative pressure on the sector and ensure policy supports continued investment in the workforce, in productions, and in audiences.

At the opera too

Opera singers are also demanding improved pay, work-life balance and clarity of their terms and conditions.

Negotiations between Equity, represented by a working group of members together with union officials, and UK Theatre / SOLT are set to begin, after Equity submitted its claim on 30 July.

Equity is demanding improvements to the agreement that sets minimum standards on pay, terms and conditions for opera singers, and covers principals, covers and freelance singers working in UK Theatre / SOLT member opera companies.

The claim calls for improved weekly pay, especially to support the lowest paid, and to reflect changing performance patterns in the industry.

It also includes demands for improved notice of scheduling for a better work-life balance and family friendly working, and calls for clearer terms and conditions for artists and engagers.

Commenting on the claim, Equity Singers & Dancers official Lottie Stables said:

The demands from Equity’s membership are clear – for too long they have seen their pay stagnate, whilst being expected to show ever more flexibility with their working patterns.

This needs to stop. If managers are serious about artists’ wellbeing and dignity, they must address the demands of this claim and ensure fair weekly pay, improved scheduling and transparent terms for all singers.

Equity will submit a claim for improvements to terms and conditions for stage management across opera and ballet later in 2026.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

Canadian-Palestinian activist, Ahmad Hajahmad Jarrar, has been charged under terror laws after a speech in Toronto against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Meanwhile, charges have been dropped against three Israel supporters who committed or threatened actual harm to pro-Palestine protesters.

Canada is following the UK in its lawfare war on anti-genocide speech and protest.

The charges against the pro-Palestine activist

Jarrar was arrested for supposedly making “public statements that advocated for the detestation and harm against members of the Israeli and Jewish communities”, Toronto police said.

The force added that he “acted for the benefit of, and in association with, Hamas, a designated terrorist group”. His reported actual words did not mention the banned group:

Teach your children the Zionist entity is the enemy. Teach your children that the resistance is an honour.

Jarrar’s lawyer said his client was innocent and being targeted for speaking against the murder of civilians. He added that Jarrar had not been charged with what the police said he was arrested for.

He faces a single charge arising from speaking at public demonstrations. No violence, no weapon, no one harmed. Speaking out at a protest about the killing of civilians is protected expression, not terrorism.

The police told the media he ‘advocated for detestation and harm’ but he is not charged with that. We’ll be looking closely at how and why this case came to be, and we’re confident it won’t hold up when measured against the law.

Police have provided no additional details or evidence, citing court restrictions for reporting on the case.

Impunity for the opposite side

Meanwhile, the Canadian double standard is no less clear than its equivalent in the US. In 2024, Ilan-Reuben Abramov attacked anti-genocide demonstrators with a nail gun while screaming:

Every fucking Palestinian will die.

Abramov was charged but has never been brought to trial, leading campaigners to suspect the charges have been quietly dropped.

In February 2025, far-right extremist Eli Schwarz was arrested after threatening anti-genocide protesters. He admitted to police that he was a member of the terrorist group, Jewish Defence League.

When arrested, he was wearing a t-shirt praising Zionist terrorist Meir Kahane. Police found a rifle with scope at his home, along with 10 boxes of ammunition.

Schwarz was charged with making threats and improperly storing ammunition but has not been prosecuted.

In December 2025, Gabriella Bodis was charged with assault after threatening anti-genocide protesters with ‘reagent grade’ (high strength) ammonium hydroxide, which is capable of severe damage to the eyes and skin. She has not yet been prosecuted.

Students in Canada have denounced the charges against Ahmad Jarrar.

Featured image via wearthepeace/ Instagram

By Skwawkbox

Source link