Trade union Unite is calling on Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) health minister Mike Nesbitt to intervene in the growing childminding crisis in Northern Ireland.

The news comes after a Unite survey found that an eye-watering 95% of registered childminders said their businesses were becoming non-viable due to burdensome tax changes.

As such, the union is calling on Nesbitt to ensure the publication of the Department of Health’s consultation on minimal standards in childminding.

‘Devastating impact on working households’

Stormont’s Health Department launched its consultation on 24 March 2025, before closing it on 20 June of the same year. A callout explained that it was seeking to gather feedback on “two key areas of childcare regulation,” noting that:

The first key area is in relation to vetting — specifically the requirement for all prospective childcare workers to provide a health assessment, countersigned by their GPs, in advance of taking up employment. The second key area concerns the adult:child ratios set out in the Minimum Standards for Childminding and Day Care for Children under 12.

The self-employed registered childminders (RCMs) argue that their incomes have been restricted by Northern Ireland’s low childcare ratios. Currently, one childminder can care for up to six  children under 12. However, only three of these can be under the age of 5, and only one under the age of 1.

For comparison, the Scottish system allows a childminder to care for eight children under the age of 16. Of these, six can be under 12, and three can be under primary school age. Meanwhile, in Wales, a single childminder can watch over ten children up to 12 years of age, including six under-8’s and three under-5’s.

However, in spite of consultation’s conclusion almost a year ago, the Health Department has failed to publish the findings. Unite’s regional women’s and equalities officer, Collette O’Hagan, stated that:

The department of health consulted on proposals to raise childminding ratios in Northern Ireland last June. The results of that consultation have never been published. Registered childminders deserve to know where they stand.

If this sector continues to shrink, it will have a devastating impact on working households. It is already difficult and costly to get a childcare place. Stormont needs to recognise the scale of the crisis in the childminding sector and act.

Advertisement

70% of childminders considering quitting

Unite represents most of Northern Ireland’s RCMs. As such, it recently sent out a survey on the current health of the profession, receiving 306 replies.

Shockingly, the union found that:

• 53% of the RCMs said the were ‘somewhat unlikely’ or ‘unlikely’ to remain in childminding for the coming two years. Worse still, 17% answered ‘very unlikely’ to the same question.
• 17 per cent said they were very unlikely and 53 per cent said they were either ‘unlikely’ or ‘somewhat unlikely’ to remain in the childminding profession over the next two years.
• 98% of the RCMs stated that recent tax changes would have a significant negative impact on their services.
• 95% were currently reconsidering the continuing viability of their business.

Those recent tax changes were part of the wider ‘Making Tax Digital’ transition. The switch removed a crucial 10% ‘wear and tear’ allowance for carers, and added significant administrative responsibilities

This being the case, Northern Ireland is in clear danger of losing up two 70 percent of its childminders in the near future. This could have a further knock-on effect for working parents, who could suddenly find themselves without childcare options.

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham, said:

The results of this survey are stark. Childminders in Northern Ireland are being squeezed to breaking point. The future of the profession is in doubt – raising concerns for workers with dependent children. Stormont needs to act now to protect childminders.

Featured image via Unsplash

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link

Looking back at the events around my section 21 ‘no fault’ eviction, I can see how a random event led to the actions of my landlord of ten years.

I had become aware that the wall of my front yard had caved-in – probably the result of a car backing into it. Reluctantly, this was something I had to pass onto my landlord.

It took ages for anyone to come and fix the wall, but when they did, they didn’t finish it. Instead, they left some tools and a bag of sand in my neighbour’s driveway.

My neighbour complained to me, so again, I had to pass this onto my landlord. I also informed him that the wall hadn’t been finished.

This was approaching the time when my contract for the next rental period would be signed. As I waited for that email from my letting agent about my contract, I had a horrible feeling. I’d been hearing about no-fault evictions, and evictions using section 21 from disgruntled landlords not wanting to do repairs.

Section 21

I tried to push this out of my mind, but the email I usually got about my contract was late. Then, one day, I got an alert on my phone. My landlord of ten years now wanted me out in two months, under section 21.

Initially, I felt sick. I knew just how few properties were accessible and available for people under the age of 55. But it wasn’t just that. As someone with severe physical disabilities, I knew packing up a two-bedroom home would be impossible for me, and in that initial period, I had little support available.

As I panicked about the situation, I couldn’t eat. My weight plummeted. As bones started to protrude, they also got sore. As I have a lack of sensation below my waist, one sore positioned right at the bottom of my back (initially unseen and untreated) began to fester.

I spent every day for two months trying to find an accessible home, both through the council and privately, but everything that was accessible was sectioned-off for the elderly. My health became even more precarious with my mental health deteriorating just as much as my physical health. With nowhere to move to, I had to beg my landlord for another month.

It was only the kindness of my friends on social media, supporting me emotionally and practically, that got me through this time. This included one friend who, with her husband, helped me pack up my home. Another, a landlord, provided an accessible flat for me. This kindness was overwhelming and literally lifesaving.

Renters’ Rights Act 2026

Knowing that this flagship Labour policy will now be law will make such a difference, particularly for those with disabilities.

The Renters’ Rights Act should increase communication between tenants and landlords and help root out those unscrupulous landlords who just see their tenants as money in the bank. It doesn’t prevent evictions, but landlords will need a justified reason, such as anti-social behaviour or a tenant not paying rent.

There are other rights and responsibilities in this Act, and all renters and landlords should carefully look at what is going to change. The Shelter website is a good place to start.

The result of grassroots campaigning

This legislation – the result of a massive grassroots campaign – is something that should be celebrated, as it gives certainty and clarity for both renters and landlords. As Section 21 evictions are/were the leading cause of homelessness, it should also help lessen the load and cost on councils, in terms of having to provide temporary accommodation.

The Renters Reform Coalition (RRC) – an alliance of 16 leading housing and renters’ organisations – has campaigned for this legislation since its inception in 2020. The RRC Director said:

This Act will fundamentally rebalance the relationship between tenant and landlord, empowering England’s 11 million private renters to stand up for their rights without fear.

Sarah Elliott, chief executive of Shelter, posted back in October 2025:

The Renters Right act is the victory of a lifetime for renters who have fought for years for better protections. We are grateful to the government for making these landmark changes.

All for a bag of sand

As mentioned earlier, the weight-loss I suffered due to the stress of the eviction resulted in a very deep ‘grade four’ pressure sore on my lower back. When I moved, the district nurses swooped-in to deal with it. But even with their care and dedication, it took over three years for it to finally close.

It’s hard to fathom how a bag of sand, led to a section 21 eviction, and resulted in so much physical damage. But that’s what happened. I’m not alone, thousands of lives have been overturned with these ‘no fault’ evictions. Such horror stories will finally become a thing of the past and that’s worth celebrating.

By Ruth Hunt

Source link

It’s nearly over, readers. Just one more week of this to endure.

The most miserable election campaign of all time will end next Thursday with an election which will deliver Scotland’s most miserable devolved government of all time. Only the exact form, colour and shape of the misery remains to be determined.

So as the SNP promise through forked tongues to cut the cost of living with a pledge they know full well they have no chance of being able to actually implement, while using the powers they DO have to INCREASE the cost of everything that makes life WORTH living, let’s look at exactly what flavour of dog vomit we can expect to be choking down along with our state-approved organic broccoli and fat-free gruel for the next half-decade.

These are our own, purely plucked from thin air, estimates of the likelihood of each possible outcome of next week’s election.

Advertisement

(1) SNP majority: 18%
(2) SNP minority, indy majority: 65%
(3) SNP minority, Unionist majority: 16%
(4) Any other outcome: 1%

(We’ve rounded that last one up from 0.1%.)

The least desirable of those outcomes is also, sadly, the most likely. John Swinney is DESPERATE to avoid an SNP majority, because it leaves him with no excuses when he fails to deliver the “100% guaranteed” second referendum he’s been promising.

?

Advertisement

It would, however, provide him with an excuse for another coalition with the Greens, which also lets him pretend that his hands are tied about pushing through their “social justice” agenda of super-fringe extremist bigotry opposed by the vast majority of the Scottish electorate.

The second-worst outcome is the second-most likely. The upside of an SNP majority is that it starkly exposes the fraud of that referendum pledge. However, the effect of that exposure is likely to be pretty minimal. Most SNP voters now don’t prioritise independence, so they’ll just shrug as Swinney sticks it on the back burner for another five years.

There’ll be fewer insane Green policies enacted, but that’s about it for good news. As the SNP desks in the chamber are filled with the sort of brainless career drones the party cultivated in the Sturgeon era as she ruthlessly expelled anyone of talent as a potential threat, even the rank incompetence of the last 10 years will take a sharp turn for the worse, and as the looming £5bn deficit crisis takes hold over the course of the Parliament, public services will suffer catastrophic cuts and failures.

The government will rapidly become toxically unpopular in much the same way that Keir Starmer’s UK administration has, but there’ll be nothing anyone can do about it for half a decade.

Advertisement

Outcome (3) is theoretically the best we can even slightly realistically hope for, but even that is a proper grade-A mess. Everyone with even a crumb of intelligence (including the few sane people still in the SNP) recognises that the SNP need a spell in opposition to recover their purpose, but the chances of that happening are slim, even in the already unlikely event of Unionist MSPs being in the majority. (Something that’s only a possibility at all because of the “Both Votes SNP” strategy.)

Whether Reform or Labour were the second-largest party it’s highly doubtful that the Unionist parties could marshal enough votes to make either Malcolm Offord or Anas Sarwar FM. So the most likely upshot of outcome (3) is – may God have mercy on all of our souls – another election, and honest to God if that happens we’re closing down Wings forever and going to live in a cave.

So, y’know, good luck, folks. With the exception of Fergus Ewing in Inverness & Nairn, we’re struggling to think of a single constituency candidate we could bear to vote for. Anywhere else we’d be spoiling our paper in the most creatively offensive way we could think of, or casting a purely token vote for an independent.

When it comes to the list, there are at least options. There’s zero prospect of any minor pro-indy parties getting seats, but then that’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. There’s nothing to LOSE by voting for any of them, so you could give it a punt, hope for a miracle and at least have a clear conscience.

Advertisement

If you vote for Unionist parties on the list you’re doing the exact same thing as Both-Votes-SNP-ers (increasing the number of Unionist MSPs) but at least you’d be doing it for a better reason – the longterm benefit of the independence movement – and not lying to yourself about it.

But the true, grim reality is that it simply doesn’t matter. There is nothing you can do next Thursday to meaningfully change anything in Scotland, and certainly not for the better. (The least HARM you can do is simply to NOT vote SNP or Green.)

The long-range weather forecast currently suggests a chilly (11C) day with a high chance of rain across the whole country, making staying home with a nice bowl of soup and a sandwich an attractive prospect, and we suspect if we lived there it’s the option we’d be taking.

We used to think this was overly cynical:

Advertisement

?

But these days it’s the moral choice. The collection of useless gravy-chasers trying to get elected next week will take every vote cast, however reluctant, as an endorsement. Pretty much all you can do right now is keep your own hands clean.

Source link

Maine Democratic Gov. Janet Mills suspended her campaign for Senate on Thursday, as her progressive challenger, oyster farmer Graham Platner, continued to lead in the polls and in fundraising.

It’s a shocking fall off for the incumbent governor, who was once the preferred candidate of national Democrats in the race.

And it sets up a likely general election matchup between Platner and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a five-term incumbent with a formidable electoral track record who Democrats are nonetheless hopeful they can knock off amid backlash to Republicans and President Donald Trump.

“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else – the fight – to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” Mills said in a statement Thursday morning.

Source link

Israel has illegally ordered 42 Palestinians to leave their homes in Batn al-Hawa, East Jerusalem, by May 17, so it can hand the homes to Israeli terrorist settlers.

Half of the people Israel is illegally evicting are children.

Israeli authorities ordered 42 Palestinians in Batn al-Hawa, half of them children, out by 17 May.
Properties are set to be handed to settler group Ateret Cohanim.
An occupying power cannot remove protected persons except in limited circumstances.
This is forcible transfer. https://t.co/aoxosL5ece pic.twitter.com/YJHjAcLnrv

— Norwegian Refugee Council (@NRC_Norway) April 29, 2026

“Reclamation” — for who?

Israel is handing the properties to the illegal settler group Ateret Cohanim. The entity claims to be:

[a] leading urban land reclamation organization in Jerusalem, which has been working for over 40 years to restore Jewish life in the heart of ancient Jerusalem.

Of course, in this context, restoring Jewish life means the theft of more Palestinian land and homes — illegal under international law.  Article 49 of the Geneva Convention prohibits:

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory […] The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

So not only is it illegal to forcibly evict Palestinians from their homes, but it is also illegal to then move Israeli’s into those homes.

Additionally, the Hague Regulations [1907] prohibit the seizure and destruction of private property. This means that both building and expanding settlements breach international humanitarian law.

5/6 Under international law, the forcible transfer of Palestinians under occupation is prohibited.

The confiscation of private property is also prohibited, except where absolutely necessary for military operations.

Advertisement

— Norwegian Refugee Council (@NRC_Norway) March 17, 2026

Similarly, the Rome Statute states that the forcible expulsion of a population is both a war crime and a crime against humanity.

Scores of Palestinians ordered out from their neighborhood in the old city of Jerusalem. Their homes are given to settlers.
This is forcible transfer, a war crime under both the Geneva Convention 4 and the Rome Statute. https://t.co/VQ5LZJSWFI

— Abdel Aziz Hamad ALUWAISHEG (@abuhamad1) April 29, 2026

As the International Committee of the Red Cross said, the occupying power:

has a duty to ensure the protection, security, and welfare of the people living under occupation and to guarantee that they can live as normal a life as possible, in accordance with their own laws, culture, and traditions.

Not the first time

Israel issued a similar evacuation order in February, which evicted 80 individuals in the same neighbourhood. The properties went to the same illegal group. Illegal settlers evicted 11 of the 15 families by force.

3/6 Between December & January, Israeli authorities forcibly evicted 30 Palestinians in the neighbourhood.

The cases are driven by the settler organisation Ateret Cohanim, which seeks to take over the land through claims linked to a Jewish trust dating to the early 20th century.

— Norwegian Refugee Council (@NRC_Norway) March 17, 2026

So far, Israel has forcibly and illegally removed 37 families from the neighbourhood since 2015. This amounts to hundreds of people.

4/6 Israeli law permits Jewish claims to property in East Jerusalem from before 1948. Palestinians remain barred from reclaiming property they lost in the same period.

— Norwegian Refugee Council (@NRC_Norway) March 17, 2026

Ethnic cleansing

Israel is the modern day Nazi state. Just like the Nazi’s did to Jews in Europe during World War 2, Israel is forcibly expelling Palestinians from their land.

Israel may not be Nazi, but the methods used by Zionists seem like those used by the Nazis. https://t.co/17cngttC1D

— Paolo (Poli) Bolpet (@Bolpet) April 30, 2026

There is a word for forcibly expelling people from their homes…

Ethnic cleansing house by house, neighborhood by neighborhood.

Palestinians in Jerusalem are being expelled from their homes in order to hand them over to Jewish settlers. https://t.co/WSm6gsaV89

— Khaled Elgindy (@elgindy_) April 29, 2026

Genocidal settler-colonists succeed in further ethnic cleansing with full impunity. DISGUSTING.

WHEN WILL WE SEE CONSEQUENCES??? https://t.co/rOFoW5RC7d

— Skwedaibagol (@SkwedaibagoI) April 29, 2026

Yet, where is the Western media outrage? Where are the politicians calling out the war crimes?

This is a crime, yet another crime, committed by Israel without a murmer of protest from governments that trumpet the purported values of democracy at every other opportunity.

Thank you, @NRC_Norway, for being almost the last organisation on earth with any integrity. https://t.co/oQtNLGOns6

— John Kittridge (@JohnKittridge) April 29, 2026

It’s very naive of countries war criminal leaders & govs that allow/enable/aid/abet/fund/protect/support/give impunity 2 terrorist genocidal apartheid wanted war criminal Israel, 2 think they’ll get away with it.
The world & @IntlCrimCourt
won’t let them!https://t.co/Iw3oDUEWbh

— Ange #WeAreAllEqual (@Ange_Sandgrown) April 29, 2026

Two jews are stabbed in London, and understandably, the whole world is up in arms. Yet Jewish supremacists in Israel commit crimes like this every single day without fail, and there isn’t a single whimper from the mainstream media or politicians.

Israel is committing war crime after war crime, and let’s not pretend that stealing all of Palestine was not its plan all along.

Feature image via silwanic/YouTube

By HG

Source link

Nearly 20 Filipino workers in Newcastle are facing forced return in practice after being abruptly dismissed by Global Maritime Engineering Services (GME Services).

Recruited from the Philippines through Magsaysay Global Services, Inc., the workers were promised stable employment as skilled staff. Instead, they report discrepancies between contracts and payslips, unclear deductions, and sudden termination after being misled about a transfer abroad.

Workers have also raised concerns about a visa anomaly, having been recruited as skilled staff but later finding out they may have been issued dependant visas. This raises serious questions about deception in the recruitment and deployment process.

The company has instructed workers to return to the Philippines “with immediate effect”. While not a formal deportation, advocates warn this amounts to forced return, pressuring workers to leave before they can assert their rights.

Key concerns include:

• Possible wage discrepancies and underpayment.
• Deceptive recruitment and visa mismatch.
• Abrupt sacking of workers without fair process.
• Pressure to leave the UK immediately.

Advocates are calling for:

• A stop to any forced or premature return.
• Ensuring full payment of all wages owed.
• An investigation into GME Services and the labour supply chain.
• The clarification and securing of workers’ immigration status.

Advocates are calling for urgent action and solidarity. They’re warning that this case reflects a broader pattern of migrant worker exploitation in the UK and across Europe.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

Green party deputy leader Mothin Ali has allegedly advised suspended election candidates to bring in lawyers against the party. Multiple members were suspended over alleged historical antisemitic comments.

Factional splits in the Green Party

The Green’s admin machine has started capitulating to ‘antisemitism’ smears as the Israel lobby tries to take out pro-Palestine candidates and bring the party to heel. Several candidates and members have been suspended, including anti-Zionist Jews.

The comments were made at a private meeting held by Greens for Palestine. However, the discussion was secretly recorded and leaked to the Murdoch press, a tactic used repeatedly by supporters of Israel. Ali also allegedly spoke of the need to “put the party on notice,” and launch a class action lawsuit — fearing more suspensions to come.

The recording claims to show Ali telling suspended candidates to get “serious legal advice.” In addition, Ali allegedly warns that the party will not simply roll over and accept the suspension.

Same script, different party

In comments evocative of Labour’s surrender to the ‘Labour antisemitism’ scam, Ali said the national party is bypassing its usual disciplinary process to “fast track” suspensions.

He added that party functionaries are copying the disastrous attitude that saw Labour crumble:

Their attitude at the moment is that if 500 members get upset, it’s not a big deal compared to 226,000. It’s that same Labour attitude of ‘you’ve got nowhere else to go.

What we need to do is we need to get some serious legal advice. We need to make sure that we are putting the party on notice straight away, and we need to start with some class action. Because it won’t be the end. They’re coming after more and more people.

The suspensions have come in response to a shameless smear campaign by Keir Starmer’s front bench. That group plainly fears a wipe-out to the Greens and is trying to nobble the party’s candidates.

The Greens’ Jewish party leader has tended to far to treat the smear campaign with the contempt it deserves, but his party’s admin has failed to follow suit. Instead of slapping down Labour’s tactics and calling out the desperation behind it, they have so far given in. That must stop, before the damage to the Greens and their surging electoral popularity is irreversible.

Featured image via Mothin Ali/Facebook

By Skwawkbox

Source link

The judgement came to five key conclusions:

• The OfS over-reached its authority with regard to the University’s Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement. As the UoS maintained, the statement was not a governing document, and therefore not subject to OfS oversight.
• The OfS conflated “freedom of speech within the law” and “lawful speech”. The watchdog maintained the absolutist position that any lawful speech should be subject to the univesity’s protection. However, the judge ruled that UoS could protect students and staff from bullying without violation of freedom of speech.
• UoS already had clear protections of academic freedom in place. Likewise, the policy statement posed no threat to that freedom. As such, the OfS made an error in law in that it failed to “read the relevant University documents as a whole”.
• The UoS Freedom of Speech Code of Practice was “so plainly relevant” that the OfS was “irrational” and “misdirected itself” in failing to give it proper regard.
• The OfS failed to consider whether the university had remedied any alleged breaches before issuing its fine.

Overall, the judge declared that the OfS’ decision:

was vitiated by bias because the OfS approached the decision with a closed mind and had therefore unlawfully predetermined the decision.

‘We are disappointed, of course, by this ruling’

Such comprehensive and damning findings might at least give any other watchdog pause. However, the OfS instead chose to celebrate the fact that its illegal fine had already caused universities to modify their inclusive policies.

Josh Fleming, OfS interim chief executive, said:

We are disappointed, of course, by this ruling. We will carefully consider the consequences of the judgment before deciding on next steps. We will reflect on the Judge’s findings and use them to help inform our future approach.

Our focus remains on students and the sector, and we are pleased that following our investigation a dozen institutions, including the University of Sussex, have amended policies which restricted freedom of speech. As a result, students and academics should feel greater confidence in their ability to engage in the free and frank exploration of thought that characterises English higher education.

This utter lack of contrition, or even acknowledgement of wrongdoing, is a particularly dire sign of things to come.

In August 2025, the government handed even greater power to the OfS via a new freedom-of-speech law governing England’s universities. As such, come the autumn, academics and visiting speakers will be able to pass complaints directly to the regulator.

Vivienne Stern, chief executive of higher education body Universities UK, said universities wanted to

work closely with the Office for Students to reset relationships and rebuild trust. […]

Effective regulation depends not just on enforcement, but on trust, clarity, and a shared understanding of respective roles.

However, it is hard to see how exactly universities will rebuild such trust. Like so many of the UK’s institutions, the OfS has been thoroughly captured by a deeply transphobic brand of bigotry masquerading as concern for ‘free speech’.

The OfS is quite openly and directly prejudiced against trans and non-binary students and staff. As a regulator, it is utterly unfit to perform its function with regard to all of its charges.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link

(Alamy)

3 min read13 min

As a former executive director of the Office for Students (OfS), the regulator for higher education in England, it was hard to read the stinging judgement in a court case between it and one of the universities it oversees.

Advertisement

I was not involved in the investigation, but I know many of those who were are diligent public servants, charged with a fiendishly difficult brief.

That said, the judgement is devastating: the court found the OfS had misread, misunderstood, or just plain missed issues of legal meaning, fair process, and the need for unbiased judgement in an investigation around free speech at the University of Sussex. Hard work and good intentions will not help pay the significant legal costs that Sussex will likely be awarded by the court.

The court’s conclusion that OfS appeared to have predetermined the outcome of its investigation is particularly troubling. The regulator must surely make significant changes in response, with its focus on addressing problems not broadcasting them. Independent reports found that regulation of access and participation – which I led in my four years at OfS – was less confrontational but still rigorous. I hope it provides a useful template.

Advertisement

But this latest reckoning in higher education will not be the last, whatever the OfS does. Because the regulator’s woes are a symptom, not the cause, of wider dysfunction in English higher education.

In my new role as Director of The Post-18 Project think-tank, I recently published a report setting out how, for 30 years, English politicians have expected student choice and competition to make the higher education sector more efficient, better quality, and more closely tied to the labour market. The OfS was set up to be the referee in this marketised system.

But none of those goals has been consistently achieved – and the OfS has not properly worked – because higher education is not a market. The government controls how much students pay their university, which is a different amount from how much those students are expected to pay back, which is routinely more than they borrowed in the first place. Not only does the system fail to reward good teaching – its funding structure actively discourages it. No one knows what the proper limits of academic freedom are or ought to be, because Parliament ducked the question while legislating that more had to be done. Meanwhile, students are choosing between heating and eating as living costs outstrip the support available.

English politicians have made higher education systemically incoherent – none of the parts fit together properly, and while the OfS could clearly have made better choices, its powers and purpose have always been inadequate to the problems it faces. Only a comprehensive review of all post-18 education can remedy the parlous state we are in.

Advertisement

Professor John Blake is Director of The Post-18 Project, and was Director for Fair Access and Participation at the OfS from 2022 to 2025

Source link

Source link