UNISON has hit back at criticism of upcoming strike action at Ash Field Academy. The union, which represents the vast majority of support staff at the Evington SEND school, announced a week in advance that staff would walk out on 30 April, 13 May, and 14 May over the victimisation of UNISON rep Tom Barker.

The Ash Field Academy dispute

Barker has been suspended since October 2025 on unspecified allegations. Discovery Schools Academy Trust (DSAT), the multi-academy trust which operates Ash Field Academy, imposed the suspension just days after UNISON members had voted to strike over DSAT-imposed staffing cuts.

Barker was a central figure in organising this strike ballot, and in encouraging members to use their vote. This was just the latest chapter in Barker’s long-standing work to organise for UNISON at the school. More details of this history are below.

UNISON believes that Barker’s record of successfully supporting and advocating for members at Ash Field Academy is the reason for his suspension. The union made this clear to DSAT soon after the suspension, and has repeatedly called for his reinstatement. The Trust has repeatedly refused this.

DSAT counter claims

DSAT claims that the suspension is due to allegations unrelated to Barker’s trade union work. After almost six months of suspension, DSAT has still not presented any evidence of wrongdoing – nor even detailed the allegations against him. Yet Barker is still suspended and UNISON members are still being deprived of their workplace rep.

UNISON consulted members at Ash Field Academy about how they wished to respond to the suspension. They voted to try petitioning the employer, and filing a grievance demanding Barker’s reinstatement, and to hold a ballot for strike action if those attempts failed.

DSAT refused to act on the petition, and refused to formally hear the grievance. So members had no option but to consider strike action.

In a March strike ballot of UNISON members at Ash Field Academy, 87% of participants voted to take strike action over Barker’s suspension and the attack this represents on their rights. The only demand UNISON is making is that Barker is reinstated. Doing so would cost DSAT nothing.

The upcoming action is a result of this ballot. DSAT was notified of the result several weeks ago, giving it fair warning that if they did not reinstate Barker, strike action would follow. To date, it still hasn’t reinstated him.

Barker’s history of UNISON organising

Barker has worked at Ash Field Academy as a Teaching Assistant for close to ten years. He’s been a UNISON steward for seven years.

In 2023, Barker was a principal organiser of an 8-month long dispute. It ultimately won pay increases of between 18% and 25% for student facing staff after the revelation that Ash Field Academy leaders, despite claims to the contrary, were underpaying the workforce. This was one of the most successful education disputes in UNISON’s history.

In the same year, alongside parents, students, and UNISON members, Barker helped organise a campaign to defend the residential provision at Ash Field Academy, ‘Resi’, which was under threat by Leicester City Council.

When Ash Field Academy Trust joined DSAT in early 2024, Barker, working alongside other UNISON reps, successfully defended members against cuts to pay and conditions.

In 2025, Barker and his Ash Field Academy fellow members defeated DSAT’s attempts to cut around 10% of the support staff.

In addition to these examples of his collective leadership, Barker has also been a fearless advocate for members on an individual basis. Barker has represented many members during HR processes, where he has fought tirelessly for their interests.

Sam Randfield, UNISON Leicester City branch secretary, said:

UNISON believes that Tom is being victimised because of his record in effectively representing and advocating on behalf of UNISON members at Ash Field Academy. This attack on Tom is therefore an attack on the collective rights of all members at Ash Field.

If DSAT is successful in victimising Tom, all members – not just in UNISON, but other trade unions too – could suffer in the future. We cannot allow DSAT to get away with attacking trade union reps because they don’t like their history of organising.

We have given DSAT ample opportunity to back down from their position. They have refused every request to reinstate Tom. Despite his willingness to cooperate with the investigation into the unspecified allegations against him, they insist on keeping Tom suspended.

That is why our members have been left with no option other than to take strike action. We call upon DSAT to immediately reinstate Tom. That is UNISON’s one and only demand.

An Ash Field Academy UNISON member who wishes to remain anonymous said:

The Trust has said repeatedly in communications with the press that it supports the legal rights of trade unions. That is not our experience.

I believe Tom is being scapegoated for his work on behalf of union members at the school.

The last thing we want to do is negatively impact the lives of our students and their families. But the truth is that striking appears to be the only language the Trust responds to.

Last year, the Trust cut around 10% of support staff at Ash Field. They did this against our protests. We said we are already understaffed and struggling to support our students.

It was not until we won a strike ballot that the Trust agreed to reverse this decision. Why do we always need to make threats for them to listen?

Advertisement

Not only is getting rid of Tom wrong morally, it will do immense harm to our ability to defend services against attacks from the Trust. That’s why I am striking.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

Source link

The Premier League’s allocation of European places is straightforward in principle but fluid in practice.

League positions will determine most spots, while the outcomes of the Europa League and Europa Conference League can add or reassign places.

Recent results have opened realistic pathways for as many as 10 English clubs to play in European competitions next season, and there are credible routes for six to reach the Champions League.

What would create six Champions League places from the Premier League?

Two scenarios produce a sixth Champions League entrant.

The simplest is an English winner of the Europa League who finishes outside the top four, that club would take a Champions League berth in addition to the usual top four qualifiers.

Nottingham Forest and Aston Villa meet in the Europa League semi-finals, guaranteeing an English finalist and therefore a plausible English winner.

If that winner finishes outside the top four, the Premier League will have six Champions League representatives next season.

A second, less likely route is a combination of domestic and European cup outcomes that shifts places down the domestic table.

Either way, the key point is that continental success by an English club can increase the number of Champions League slots given to the Premier League.

How nine or 10 teams becomes possible

The Europa Conference League winner gains direct entry to next season’s Europa League.

Crystal Palace is in the Conference League semi-finals and are the most likely English side to lift that trophy.

If Palace win the Conference League and an English club also wins the Europa League, the knock-on effects would push additional Premier League teams into European competitions, potentially taking the total to nine.

If the Europa League winner is also outside the top six domestically and Palace win the Conference League, the Premier League could reach the ten-team mark in Europe next season.

The domestic picture and immediate triggers

Manchester United’s recent results have put them close to securing a top four finish, at the time of the latest update they required only a small number of points to confirm Champions League qualification.

That domestic stability matters because it fixes several of the league’s European slots and clarifies which positions would be affected by continental winners.

Meanwhile, the battle for sixth and seventh, remains tight. Brighton, Fulham, Bournemouth, Chelsea and Brentford are all involved and fighting for success.

The FA Cup’s role

The FA Cup winner affects which league positions feed into the Europa League and Conference League but does not change the total number of English teams in Europe.

If a club already qualified for Europe wins the FA Cup, the European place tied to the cup transfers down the league table.

That means the identity of the cup winner can affect whether seventh or eighth place in the Premier League gains continental football.

Practical takeaway for clubs and supporters

For clubs chasing European qualification, the message is simple, secure league position where possible and treat the remaining cup competitions as opportunities rather than complications.

For supporters, the permutations are worth following because a single result in Istanbul or Leipzig can alter the landscape for a dozen clubs.

The mechanics are indeed technical, but the outcome is binary. Domestic form locks in most places; European trophies can add one or two more.

The next few weeks will resolve which of these scenarios becomes real.

Featured image via the Premier League

By Faz Ali

Source link

With Morgan McSweeney summoned for questioning before the foreign affairs select committee today, the Peter Mandelson scandal continues to decimate the ailing Starmer administration.

There are now calls for a public inquiry into Labour Together, the think tank used by McSweeney to propel his favoured candidate into power.

Labour Together continues to receive funding from Israel lobby

On 17 April, current director Allison Phillips, apparently eager to break with the McSweeney legacy, declared that the organisation would be changing their name and no longer backing Labour leadership candidates or donating to individual MPs.

However, away from the Whitehall soap opera, many are ignoring the fact that Labour Together continues to operate as a limited company. Indeed, last month alone, they raked in another £500,000.

On March 3rd, David Sainsbury made a £125,000 donation to Labour Together. This was preceded by another £125,000 payment on December 3rd. Under Tony Blair, Sainsbury was reportedly seated “at one of the top tables” at a Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) fundraising event.

In October, David Sainsbury made two separate £20,000 cash payments to Bridget Phillipson, Labour’s Education Minister. Phillipson, another LFI supporter, has received money from pro-Israeli lobbyists Stuart Roden and Trevor Chinn.

Phillipson has also previously accepted a £3,000 donation from ELNET, who list the Israeli Foreign Ministry as one of their “partners”. A 2024 ELNET delegation to the Israeli state was led by Jeffrey Epstein’s “best pal” Peter Mandelson. When Mandelson was later installed as US ambassador, Starmer told him:

After many years of our discussions, we get to work together side by side.

Bridget Phillipson’s unsuccessful bid for Labour deputy leader was backed by the Jewish Labour Movement. JLM’s national chair, Ella Rose-Jacobs, previously worked for the Israeli Embassy. Their vice-chair, Izzy Lenga, reportedly participated in military training with the IDF.

Sainsbury’s further contributions

In October, Sainsbury gave a £44,400 “non-cash” donation to Starmer’s chief secretary Darren Jones. Jones previously received over £57,000 “in kind” from Labour Together. He also received “in kind” support from intelligence firm Hakluyt, a former employer of Olly Robbins.

On June 7th 2024, one day after Starmer’s election, the Labour Party registered a payment of £2.5 million from David Sainsbury. More recently, he has been a key financer of Labour Together. Apparently, the McSweeney-Simons scandals have done little to halt operations.

Another person still funding Labour Together is Sainsbury’s daughter, Francesca Perrin. On March 31st, she gave the organisation £100,000. This year, Perrin has also given two Labour MPs £30,000: Wes Streeting aide Zubir Ahmed and JLM-backed David Pinto-Duschinsky.

Perrin has funded several high-ranking Labour MPs in the last few months. Bridget Phillipson received £15,000. Josh Simons £30,000. Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood were given £50,000 each. Shabana has also been a major beneficiary of Labour Together support.

Like Epstein-associate Peter Mandelson, Starmer also wanted to give Matthew Doyle an ambassador job. In 2013, Doyle spoke at an event organised by Labour Friends of Israel. The event was supported by another lobby group called “We Believe in Israel”, led by Luke Akehurst.

Starmer is a liar

Last week, Lindsay Hoyle ejected MPs Lee Anderson and Zarah Sultana from the House of Commons for calling Starmer a liar. The Speaker’s father, Douglas Hoyle, was a co-founder of Labour Friends of Israel, a lobby group that refuses to reveal its donors. McSweeney concealed over £730,000 in Labour Together donations.

For years, Morgan McSweeney and Labour Together operated in the shadows. Labour Friends of Israel director Michael Rubin said:

Morgan was essential in dragging Labour back to sanity.

With dead duck Prime Minister Starmer talking about leading Labour into the next election whilst MPs plot behind his back, “sanity” is the last word I would use.

Featured image via the Canary

By Jody McIntyre

Source link

Source link

Morgan McSweeney appeared before MPs in parliament on Tuesday

4 min read21 min

Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff has described the moment when he realised the depth of Lord Mandelson’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein as having “a knife through my soul”.

Advertisement

Speaking on Tuesday, Morgan McSweeney said he initially believed that Mandelson was telling the truth about the extent of his relationship with the paedophile financier ahead of being appointed UK ambassador to the US, but then realised in September 2025 that he “didn’t get the full truth”.

It was in September when Bloomberg published correspondence between the pair that further evidenced the depth of their friendship.

“The nature of the relationship that I understood he had with Epstein was not a close friendship,” said McSweeney, giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

Advertisement

“How I understood it at the time was a passing acquaintance that he regretted having, and that he apologised for.”

He added: “What has emerged since then was way, way, way worse than I had expected at the time.

“And it was when I saw the pictures, when I saw the [Bloomberg revelations] in September 2025, I have to say it was like a knife through my soul.”

He told the committee that he regrets not asking the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team (PET) to probe Mandelson’s appointment more extensively before he was appointed as US ambassador. 

Advertisement

“When I look back on it, I certainly think it would have been much, much better if I’d asked PET  to ask those follow-up questions,” he said.

“My thinking at the time was, if I put follow-up questions to him in writing, and that if a senior member of staff did that, that he would feel more obligated to give the truth and the full truth.”

He also insisted that there was no “improper” pressure put on the Foreign Office by Downing Street while he was there to formalise Mandelson’s appointment.

Advertisement

“There’s a world of difference between saying we want to go quicker and saying we want to be reckless. One is proper. We want things done quickly. The other is wholly improper.

“Nobody in No in 10 ever thought it would be appropriate to skip steps,” he said.

In a rare public appearance, McSweeney gave evidence to the Emily Thornberry-led committee as part of its look at the decision by Prime Minister Keir Starmer to appoint Mandelson as the UK’s most senior diplomat in Washington.

McSweeney, a close ally of Starmer, resigned from his Downing Street role in February amid growing pressure over the decision to appoint the peer despite his links to Epstein.

Advertisement

His appearance also comes ahead of a House of Commons vote later on Tuesday on referring the Prime Minister to the Privileges Committee on the question of whether he has misled Parliament about the process by which Mandelson was appointed.

Starmer has apologised for the original decision to appoint Mandelson but insists that due process was followed throughout the process. 

Appearing before the committee earlier this morning, Sir Philip Barton, the former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office, said No 10 had shown an “uninterested” attitude towards Mandelson’s security vetting.

In his opening statement, McSweeney referenced the victims and survivors connected to Epstein’s crimes and apologised to them, adding that they were often forgotten in the middle of political stories and drama. 

Advertisement

“Women and girls were abused, exploited and scarred. They deserved protection then, and they deserve to be remembered now. I am sorry for any part this controversy has played in causing further hurt or distress,” he told MPs. 

He admitted that recommending Mandelson’s appointment was a “serious error of judgement”.

“I advised the Prime Minister in support of that appointment, and I was wrong to do so.”

McSweeney argued that, ultimately, the primary problem in his appointment was that Mandelson withheld key information from Starmer about his relationship with Epstein.

Advertisement

He denied the suggestion that the former cabinet minister was a “hero” and “mentor” to him, explaining that he felt Mandelson’s experience as an EU commissioner made him particularly suited to the task of helping secure a post-Brexit trade deal with the US.

McSweeney also said Mandelson probably would not have been appointed to the role if President Trump had lost the election to Democratic candidate Kamala Harris in November 2024, and revealed that the two leading candidates for the role were Mandelson and George Osborne, the former Tory chancellor. 

McSweeney also sought to play down the significance of Mandelson’s influence in the Labour government.

While he admitted that he was in Downing Street during the September cabinet reshuffle and texting him his thoughts, he did not respond, and none of his suggestions ended up happening.

Advertisement

Text messages between the pair will soon be released in the next tranche of files as part of a separate investigation into the Mandelson appointment.

Advertisement

Source link

Source link

The all‑British super fight is now confirmed for 2026 as two former boxing champions collide on home soil in a career‑defining clash of size, skill and legacy.

The long-anticipated all-British heavyweight showdown between Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua is officially on.

Boxing promoter, Eddie Hearn, has declared the bout “signed, sealed and delivered”. Meanwhile, both fighters have publicly confirmed contracts are in place, ending years of speculation and near-misses that have kept fans waiting for a true domestic mega-fight.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Ring Magazine (@ringmagazine)

When and where for Fury vs Joshua boxing match?

Precise details are being finalised, but the fight is expected to take place later in 2026, with several reports pointing to the fourth quarter as the most likely window.

Organisers are targeting a UK stadium setting capable of holding tens of thousands of fans. Venues such as Wembley Stadium and the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium are obvious frontrunners given their record of accomplishment hosting major boxing events.

The plan is clearly to stage the bout on home soil and on the biggest possible stage.

The road to the ring

Both fighters arrive at this meeting with complicated recent histories that explain why the fight took so long to materialise.

Fury’s career has been punctuated by long breaks, a high-profile rivalry with Deontay Wilder, and a later defeat to Oleksandr Usyk that preceded a brief retirement.

Joshua’s path included Olympic glory, world titles, losses to Usyk and a series of comeback fights.

The timing finally aligned after Fury’s comeback victory over Arslanbek Makhmudov and Joshua’s return-to-action plans, allowing promoters to stitch together a deal that had eluded them for years.

Tune-up fights and training camps

Anthony Joshua has a tune-up bout in July. Organisers view this as a necessary step to sharpen his timing and rebuild momentum after a mixed run of recent opponents.

Joshua has also been training with Oleksandr Usyk and his team, which is a notable development given Usyk’s own victories over both Joshua and Fury. The collaboration is being framed as a tactical advantage for AJ.

Fury, meanwhile, has mixed his own training arrangements, bringing back coach SugarHill Steward into his camp shortly before his comeback fight. Fury has often emphasised a degree of self-direction in his preparations.

How each man looks in the ring after their respective camps will be a major factor in assessing the outcome.

High stakes

This is a late-career clash for both men, which adds unpredictability. Injuries, training setbacks or an upset in a tune-up fight could delay or alter the matchup.

Boxing’s history is full of last-minute changes. Promoters are mindful that even with contracts signed, the fight’s timing and staging remain vulnerable to the usual risks, injuries in camp, failed medicals or unforeseen personal issues.

Still, the commercial and sporting incentives to make the fight happen are enormous, so expect organisers to push hard to keep the schedule on track.

Beyond the ropes

This fight is more than a sporting contest; it’s a global entertainment event.

Reports indicate that Saudi financier Turki Alalshikh, who is backing the event, has stipulated a major musical performance as part of the show. Dua Lipa is a proposed headliner.

That kind of crossover entertainment underlines the scale of the production being planned, and the desire to make the event a cultural moment as well as a boxing match.

Which boxer has the edge?

Predicting a winner is difficult and depends on multiple variables: ring rust, physical condition, tactical adjustments, and how each fighter’s style matches up on the night.

Fury’s size, movement and unorthodox style have troubled elite opponents. Meanwhile Joshua’s power, athleticism and improved boxing IQ under different camps make him dangerous at any stage.

Both men have had recent setbacks and long layoffs at various points, which levels the playing field in some respects.

Ultimately, the fight will come down to who executes their game plan under pressure and who can impose their strengths while minimising vulnerabilities.

What boxing fans should watch next

Fans should watch for official announcements on the date and venue, confirmation of undercard fights, and the outcome of Joshua’s July tune-up bout, which will shape expectations heading into the main event.

Training footage, sparring reports and any pre-fight press tours will also offer clues about form and mindset.

Given the commercial muscle behind the promotion, expect a global broadcast plan and a spectacle designed to attract casual viewers as well as hardcore boxing fans.

This fight has been on the cards for many years. Finally, we will see a convergence of star power, national interest and commercial backing.

When Fury and Joshua meet, it will be more than a heavyweight contest. This will be a defining moment for British boxing and a major event on the 2026 sporting calendar.

Featured image via Getty Images

By Faz Ali

Source link

Source link

Source link