radiofree.asia

Category: UK

  • Tory Illegal Migration Act will ramp up asylum hellscape in the UK, according to new research

    Braverman’s recent rhetoric around the Refugee Convention has been abhorrent – and the Conservative policies it underpins are about to wreck lives in the usual callous way. Now, a new report from the Refugee Council has laid bare the likely impact of the new Illegal Migration Act. It states that Tory asylum policies could render tens of thousands of migrants at risk of destitution.

    Illegal Migration Act

    The Refugee Council analysed new Home Office statistics on asylum applications for those who’ve made the dangerous Channel crossing. Their report found that nearly three-quarters of the estimated 14,648 people who made the journey this year would be granted asylum if the UK processed their claims.

    Notably, the new report highlighted this in light of the new Illegal Migration Act. The legislation became law on the 20 July, and will deny asylum claims from migrants crossing the Channel. Specifically, the Refugee Council found that the Act could push over 35,000 people arriving by small boat into “permanent limbo”. This estimate refers to those who would have their asylum claim deemed permanently inadmissible, yet are unable to return to their country of origin.

    When in force, the new Act will bar people from claiming asylum if they’ve entered the UK via ‘illegal’ routes. This includes those seeking asylum who have arrived via the Channel, or through perilous lorry journeys. The Refugee Council therefore spotlighted the horrendous impact the legislation could have:

    It is highly likely these people will disappear into the margins of communities and be at risk of long-term destitution, exploitation and abuse.

    By August 2023, the government had a backlog of over 175,000 unprocessed claims. In 2022, the Refugee Council calculated that over 40,000 asylum seekers had waited between one and three years for the Home Office to process their claim.

    Already, support for asylum seekers is abysmal. While they wait for claims to be processed, the UK denies them the right to work, offers pitiful living allowance, and makes vital services like healthcare all but inaccessible. None of this is even to mention the unsafe, unsanitary accommodation the government forces asylum seekers into.

    Now, many future asylum seekers will receive no state support while the government denies them the right to live and work safely in UK communities indefinitely.

    ‘Permanent limbo’

    Of course, the Illegal Migration Act’s solution to this unconscionable limbo is simply more racism. The legislation has become notorious for its policy to deport asylum seekers to a “safe third country” such as Rwanda.

    As the Canary’s Joe Glenton reported in June, the London High Court ruled the government’s Rwanda plan unlawful on multiple grounds. Notably, judges found that it breached Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This states that:

    No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

    After the ruling, PM Rishi Sunak pledged to contest the decision.

    The court noted that there was a “real risk” that Rwanda would return asylum seekers to their home countries, where they could face “persecution or other inhumane treatment.” Moreover, migrant rights groups have raised the issue of the country’s poor human rights record for LGBTQ+ people.

    Given all this, the Refugee Council’s new report shows that migrants will be trapped between a rock and a hard place. Essentially, the UK government will put asylum seekers at risk of re-deportation or rights violations in Rwanda, or push people into a state of perpetual precariousness and poverty in the UK.

    Breaching international law

    The report’s findings come a week after home secretary Suella Braverman attacked the United Nations (UN) Refugee Convention in a hate-filled tirade. Under the convention, all people have the right to seek asylum in another country of their choice.

    As party to the convention, both the EU and the UN refugee and human rights bodies have previously warned that the UK’s Illegal Migration Act could therefore contravene international law. On the UK parliament’s passing of the act in July, the UN high commissioner for refugees Filippo Grandi said that:

    This new legislation significantly erodes the legal framework that has protected so many, exposing refugees to grave risks in breach of international law

    Braverman’s beef with the Refugee Convention emerged in the context of this international criticism, alongside its current loss in the High Court over the legislation’s core Rwanda removal pillar. The Canary’s Alex/Rose Cocker also pointed out that Braverman’s knee-jerk reaction to these criticisms and legal challenges:

    typifies Tory responses to social issues across the board. Rather than working to find a solution, they change definitions in order to sweep a problem under the rug.

    As a result, they argued that:

    To state this simply, the home secretary appears to prefer that the UK removes itself entirely from the Refugee Convention, rather than facing up to the fact that refugees are human beings in need of help.

    Into the margins

    Ultimately then, the Refugee Council’s newest findings are more of the same from the Tories’ bigot Britain. They’re exactly what you’d expect from a government with a prodigious rap sheet of failing refugees and asylum seekers at every turn.

    Disappearing people into the margins of society has long been UK migrant policy writ large. From locking migrants up in abusive detention centres, to the Bibby Stockholm barge debacle and blatantly racist deportations, the ‘out of sight, out of mind – and not our problem’ policies highlighted by the Refugee Council are entirely on brand. The Tories can have that podium slogan for free – at least it’d be honest.

    Feature image via UK House of Lords/Wikimedia, cropped and resized to 1910 by 1000, licensed under CC BY 2.0

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • BMA issues the Tories an ultimatum over doctors’ strikes as Sunak digs his heels in

    The British Medical Association (BMA) has said it will “pause” the consultants’ NHS strikes – but only if the government gets back around the negotiating table. The doctors union has said it is willing to work with the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) to try and break the deadlock. However, PM Rishi Sunak seems unmoved – on BBC Breakfast he said the government would be happy to talk to the BMA about anything except pay.

    BMA doctors: the strikes continue

    Consultant and junior doctor members of the BMA have recently been on strike at the same time. They walked out at 7am on Monday 2 October for three days over pay and working conditions. It follows similar action in September, where both sets of professionals walked out at the same time – for the first time ever. As the Canary reported at the time:

    A two-day strike by consultants started on Tuesday 19 September. Junior doctors then joined them for a three-day strike from Wednesday.

    Previous industrial action has seen consultants and junior doctors strike at different times, allowing them to cover for each other.

    The industrial action centres around the fact that:

    So, the BMA is calling for pay restoration for junior doctors, in line with inflation since 2008/09. For consultants, it says it wants a:

    credible offer that puts an end to these pay cuts and a commits to reforming the pay review body process so that it can be truly independent in reviewing consultant pay and begin addressing these historic losses.

    However, the government has refused to budge from its 6% pay rise offer for both groups, with an additional £1,250 one-off payment for junior doctors – for an average rise of 8.8%. So, the strikes have continued, but the BMA is now offering the Tories an olive branch.

    Extending an olive branch

    As the Times reported, BMA consultant leader Dr Vishal Sharma has written to the government. He said the BMA was:

    willing to involve Acas to conciliate a resolution and would encourage you to accept this offer… Strike action is not inevitable

    However, Sharma was also clear that this was the only offer available:

    if ministers continue to refuse to engage with us, and we have no credible deal that we can put to our members by November 3, then we will have no option but to give notice for strike action to resume in November and December.

    The Times reported that BMA chiefs said the consultants’ offer might also be applied to the junior doctors’ dispute. Essentially, the BMA’s junior doctor leads already offered the government an Acas consultation in April. They stated that that offer still stands – but the government has to make the next move.

    Sharma told BBC Breakfast that, given the BMA’s letter:

    there really is no reason why the government should not come and talk to us now.

    Willful obtuseness from Sunak

    So, with the BMA extending this olive branch while chaos engulfs the government, you’d think Sunak would have bitten the union’s hand off. Instead, the PM didn’t even meet the BMA half way.

    During an interview with BBC Breakfast, Sunak said:

    We’re always willing to talk on things that are not related to pay. We’ve made that offer very clearly to the BMA… a 9% pay rise, more than the nurses, more than anyone else in the public sector. The question for them is why aren’t they coming to work?

    Of course, Sunak wilfully confused the two strikes (consultants are not getting a 9% pay rise), and he over-egged the junior doctors’ pay offer (it’s not 9%). Moreover, his divide-and-conquer tactic (‘you’re getting more money than anyone else and you’re STILL not happy?’) is well-worn. However, it’s his intentional obtuseness which is likely to put NHS workers’ noses most out of joint.

    Sunak and the government know they need to sit down with the BMA over pay – that’s how industrial relations work. By refusing to discuss the main thing doctors are striking over, the Tories are leaving no room to maneuver on either side. This is probably the point, as it leaves the BMA with no option but to strike, and the government looking like it’s playing hard ball for patients. In reality, though, these strikes are of the Tories making – and only they can resolve them.

    Featured image via BBC Breakfast – screengrab, and BBC Breakfast – screengrab

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Campaigners are outraged as water bills are set for dramatic increases to fund new infrastructure

    Water companies in England and Wales announced plans on 2 October to nearly double investment into infrastructure between 2025 and 2030. They’ve said it’s to fix leaks and reduce river pollution. However, they’re going to raise household bills to do it – and people aren’t happy.

    Water bills to increase by more than £150

    Water UK, the industry association for water companies across the country, said in a statement that the proposed investment will amount to £96bn. That’s a 90% increase in what companies spent between 2020 and 2025. It went on to explain that:

    This investment is essential to maintain the highest quality drinking water for a growing population, ensure the security of our water supply in the future and significantly reduce the amount of sewage entering rivers and seas.

    Britain’s water companies have faced criticism in recent years for their handling of water and sewage infrastructure. There were 825 sewage spills into rivers across England every day on average in 2022. That figure was around 1000 a day in 2021, and higher still in 2020. Meanwhile, pipes across England and Wales leak billions of litres of drinking water every day.

    However, to fund the investment, Water UK announced that water companies plan to hike customer bills. It said that it expected bills to rise by £13 a month, or £156 annually, by 2030.

    Severn Trent Water said on 29 September that it has raised £1bn from investors for the work. However, it also estimated the investment will cost £12.9bn. As a result, it will still levy an increase on customer bills – from an annual average of £379 in 2024/25 to £533 in 2028/29.

    Disastrous performances

    Campaigners reacted with outrage at the news customers would foot the bill. Many commenters on social media also highlighted the amount of profit the water industry has generated. The Guardian reported in August 2022 that, since privatisation at the end of the 1980s, water companies have paid more than £72bn in dividends to their shareholders. Meanwhile, company bosses had made £58m in the previous five years.

    They made these profits against a background of spiralling debt. By the end of 2022, the net debt of English water companies was £54bn. That meant an average of 20% of every water bill was used to pay off debts. Some companies’ financial records were so bad that shareholders had to step in. They gave Thames Water £750m in July, and gave £1bn to Southern Water in 2022.

    Furthermore, many companies have failed to adequately deliver basic services. As the Canary recently reported, water industry regulator Ofwat ordered 11 water companies to repay customers due to their inept performance in 2022.

    Water campaigner and former Undertones singer Feargal Sharkey also shared a November 2021 letter by Ofwat which appeared to show that water companies have already received the appropriate funding to maintain a functioning water and sewerage system:

    Water of life

    Former prime minister Margaret Thatcher privatised the water network on the promise that private companies would run it cheaper and more efficiently. However, more than 20 years on, figures on both profits and pollution show the industry is in a complete mess.

    Even if the water companies fix the deteriorating water network and deliver a competent service, all that money will still pour into the pockets of shareholders. Water, the most essential resource for all life, is being exploited in line with the core of late capitalist ideology: privatise the profits, nationalise the losses. This latest announcement comes as a punch in the gut for people everywhere.

    Additional reporting by Agence-France Presse

    Featured image via Nithin PA/Pexels

    By Glen Black

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Tories’ talk of scrapping the Winter Fuel Payment has prompted an angry response

    Reports have suggested that the Tories are thinking of scrapping the Winter Fuel Payment for all but the poorest older people. The backlash has been swift – with one petition already attracting nearly 100,000 signatures in just a matter of days.

    The Winter Fuel Payment

    The Winter Fuel Payment is a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) benefit for older people. It’s not means tested – meaning almost everyone who is old enough can get it. As the government says on its website:

    If you were born before 25 September 1957 you could get between £250 and £600 to help you pay your heating bills. This is known as a ‘Winter Fuel Payment’.

    There are some people who don’t get it – namely older people on benefits who were living in a care home between 26 June and 24 September 2023. Otherwise, the Winter Fuel Payment is a universal benefit. However, the Tories have reportedly been eyeing up slashing people’s entitlement to it.

    As Sky News first reported, sources told it that the DWP, the Treasury, and Downing Street were having a “live discussion” about means testing the benefit. It was under the premise that by doing so, the Tories could keep the so-called ‘triple lock’ on pensions. One source told Sky News:

    Mr [Rishi] Sunak was interested in the option, while the chancellor and work and pensions Secretary Mel Stride were less enthusiastic about means testing pensioner benefits.

    Therefore, according to another one of Sky News‘s sources, someone at the DWP or Treasury leaked the news to “kill it off”.

    After Sky News broke the story, the government quickly stepped in. Downing Street told it that the policy was “not happening”. It’s of little wonder it did, when even its right-wing cheerleaders at the Daily Mail object to it:

    Sign the petition

    However, given Sunak and the governments’ current policy platform of taking an axe to anything and everything, you’d be forgiven for thinking that the idea of means testing the Winter Fuel Payment isn’t dead in the water yet. So, campaign group 38 Degrees rapidly launched a petition on the issue.

    The petition started late on Friday 29 September. It noted that:

    Energy bills are still sky high and countless pensioners are struggling on the edge of fuel poverty. These payments are the only thing keeping some older people warm in the winter.

    Last year alone, 5,000 people died as a result of living in a cold and damp home. Many more saw their health conditions deteriorate. We’re in the middle of an unprecedented crisis and it’s clear the Prime Minister has no idea how tough things are for so many of us.

    Meanwhile, energy giants are making BILLIONS in profits off the back of the cost of living crisis. And with experts saying energy bills will likely stay high for the next two years, this proposal is flat out dangerous – it must be stopped.

    As of 12pm on Monday 2 October, over 85,000 people had already signed it. You can add your name here.

    Stop means testing

    Some people have argued that the Winter Fuel Payment should be means tested because the DWP gives it to even the richest older people. However, changing universal benefits to means testing is always a slippery slope. As the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) wrote the problems with means testing include:

    • It creating a very complicated system.
    • Lots of people who are entitled to the benefits ending up not claiming them.
    • It giving the government the power to create stigma around benefit claimants.
    • The end result being trapping claimants in poverty.

    Moreover, means testing benefits allows governments to consistently move the goal posts – with prescription charges being a good example.

    When Labour created the NHS, prescriptions were free for everyone. The Tories brought in prescription charges in 1952, with exceptions for people on certain (what we’d now call) benefits. A Labour government scrapped them in 1965, before they were brought back again in 1968 – and at an even higher rate of charge, although benefit claimants, children, and older people were still exempt.

    Successive Tory governments then increased prescription charges consistently above the rate of inflation. Now, we have Universal Credit which limits the entitlement to free prescriptions to only some claimants. Plus, the government has been debating increasing the age at which older people get free prescriptions.

    So, free prescriptions have gone from being a universal benefit to being means tested. Consequently, one in 10 people now don’t get their prescriptions, because they can’t afford them.

    Means testing is always the thin end of the wedge when it comes to government cuts. So, people are right to be angry about the Tories even mentioning means testing the Winter Fuel Payment. Whether they will follow through or not now remains to be seen.

    Featured image via Wikimedia and Sky News – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Crowds marched through London against the development of new North Sea oil

    Fossil Free London staged a march of hundreds of people through the capital on 30 September. It was protesting the recent regulatory approval for the development of Rosebank oil field in the North Sea. Meanwhile, new research has revealed what we could be losing as a result.

    Rosebank: emissions equivalent to 28 countries

    On 27 September, the North Sea Transition Authority gave drilling the go-ahead at the new Rosebank oil field, near Shetland in Scotland. The regulatory body, which is a public body sponsored by the Department for Energy, gave consent and Norwegian state-owned oil company Equinor to operate the oil field.

    The company, along with private company Ithaca Energy, had reportedly satisfied the regulator’s environmental concerns. However, as the Canary previously reported, past estimates have predicted massive amounts of pollution from Rosebank:

    Campaigners have previously estimated that the enormous project… will produce over 500m barrels of oil over its lifetime. This would equate to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of the 28 lowest-income countries combined.

    As a result, Fossil Free London led an “emergency” protest against the approval and what it means for the climate.

    Marching out

    On 30 September, hundreds marched from the Department of Energy Security & Net Zero at Whitehall to the Norwegian embassy on Belgrave Square. The demonstration included speeches by Green Party deputy leader Zack Polanski and Lauren MacDonald of #StopRosebank:

     

    The following day, Fossil Free London said it occupied the Intercontinental Hotel on Park Lane. The location was picked because Equinor will gather there with other fossil fuel companies for a coming Oil & Money summit:

    Joanna Warrington, spokesperson for Fossil Free London, said in a press release that:

    Our government is too cosy with big oil and now we’re paying the price. Instead of investing in schools, hospitals and the green energy transition, they are pouring billions of pounds of public money into the pockets of oil giant Equinor.

    Developing this enormous oilfield will do nothing but reinforce our dependence on dirty fossil fuels, drive fuel poverty, and accelerate the climate crisis.

    The group also stated that it also plans to “shut down” the Energy Intelligence Forum later this month. Anders Opedal, head of Equinor, is one of the event’s speakers.

    What the money could be spent on

    Friends of the Earth Scotland raised alarms over the government’s tax breaks for Equinor. The Energy Profits Levy, or ‘windfall tax’, is supposed to bring money into the UK through the taxation of oil and gas developments. However, a government incentive scheme means the operator could claim back 91p on every pound it invests in the project.

    In a press release, Friends of the Earth Scotland said that a 91% reduction on the reported £3.1bn investment Equinor and Ithaca Energy will make into Rosebank is equal to £2.8bn. As a result, the climate action group stated:

    this public money would be better invested in insulating homes and installing heat pumps which would bring down household bills and climate emissions as well as reducing the need for fossil fuels. The UK has some of the leakiest homes in Europe.

    The Scottish Government estimates it would cost approximately £12,000 to install a heat pump and insulate an average home. The tax break to Equinor would more than cover the costs for the 224,000 households across Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council areas.

    The group’s just transition campaigner, Rosie Hampton, added:

    Fossil fuels are driving the cost of living crisis as well as the devastating extreme weather we are increasingly witnessing around the world. If politicians were genuine about a fair and fast transition away from oil and gas, investing in warmer homes would be an obvious place to start. Pouring more time and money into oil and gas is doubling down on the problem rather than grasping the solutions.

    War on the climate

    Rosebank’s approval is just the latest in a long line of climate-wrecking moves by the government.

    In December 2022, it approved the creation of Whitehaven coal mine in Cumbria. Some of the coal from the mine will feed the UK’s steel industry, but the government expects 85% of the coal will be exported. Campaigners have estimated that the mine will produce 220m tonnes of greenhouse gases during its lifetime.

    Meanwhile, a map published by Friends of the Earth at the start of September revealed there are at least 15 new onshore oil and gas projects on the road to approval. This is in addition to the availability of roughly 100 new licences for drilling in the North Sea.

    Over the past few weeks, the Tories have also hitched their party to a range of populist anti-environmental measures. They included a delay in the ban on petrol and diesel cars, watering down the phase-out of domestic gas boilers, and ending requirements for landlords to meet energy efficiency targets.

    The recent State of Nature 2023 report said that one in six species in the UK are at threat of extinction, with climate breakdown being one of the major reasons for this catastrophic situation. Rosebank will do nothing to help that, and will instead enable an already-rich few to profit from the death of the planet. If that isn’t worth protesting, we don’t know what is.

    Featured image via Fossil Free London

    By Glen Black

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • People’s Assembly coach raided by cops as it made its way to the Tory Party conference

    People came out in force to protest during the Tory Party conference. On Sunday 1 October, the People’s Assembly organised national demonstrations in Manchester. However, the protest wasn’t without incident, as cops stopped an entire coach of activists coming from London. They used the excuse of having ‘intelligence’ on them to search the vehicle – and racially profiled one demonstrator in the process.

    People’s Assembly: marching on the Tories

    Year after year, the People’s Assembly has organised actions during the Tory Party conference. 2023 was no different. The group is staging a Festival of Resistance in Manchester – including workshops, entertainment, and debates. However, the centrepiece of the People’s Assembly’s organising was a National Demonstration on 1 October.

    People gathered at 12pm to march through central Manchester. Many different groups were represented. The trade unions present included the National Education Union (NEU); National Union of Rail, Maritime, and Transport Workers (RMT); GMB; and the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union:

    Thousands of people also came out to join them:

    Campaign group Stand Up To Racism had a heavy presence:

    Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) also had members at the march:

    And people travelled from across the UK to be there:

    Labour mustn’t ‘entrench’ Tory policies

    At the end of the protest, crowds heard from speakers who highlighted the Tories’ many misdemeanors. As the Morning Star reported, NEU general secretary Daniel Kebede told the assembled masses:

    The spending on the school estate — the reason for the crumbling schools — is just a third of what the Office for Government Property says is needed.

    [Education Secretary] Gillian Keegan says the children prefer porter cabins. But it’s not the children of Eton or Harrow that have to endure them.

    Kebede said the Tories at the conference must:

    listen to the voices of teachers, to the parents, and to the children who bear the weight of this burden. But if you don’t listen, we will make you listen on our picket lines and through protest and we will push back through any sense of decline.

    He also issued a warning for the increasingly right-wing Labour Party:

    We do not want the unfair and damaging policies of the party in blue to be entrenched by the party in red. Our children are an investment, they are not a burden.

    Cops’ new rationale under the Tories: stop the coaches

    However, the People’s Assembly demo wasn’t without its problems. Greater Manchester police stopped a coach carrying activists that were coming up from London – apparently because “intelligence” told the cops that the protesters were going to cause trouble:

    Campaign groups including Keep Our NHS Public were on board:

    South East London People’s Assembly told the Canary that cops held the coach for an hour. All they took was a flare and some marker pens. However, as Ellen Clifford from DPAC noted, the only person they searched was a Brown woman:

    The cops stopped the bus under the Public Order Act. Recent amendments to the act allow cops to stop anyone they think might cause serious disruption. Of course, the this argument is clearly nonsense when it comes to the People’s Assembly.

    The Canary sat in on a meeting for the demo prior to the event, where organisers rightly highlighted that People’s Assembly protests never have any issues with police. The group’s A-to-B marches are always arranged in conjunction with local councils and cops. So, it’s bizarre – yet perhaps telling – that even the politest of protesters are now police targets:

    Other that this, it appeared the demo went off without a hitch. At this point, it’s looking unlikely that the Tories will win the next general election – although a Labour victory will hardly be a cause for celebration. However, the People’s Assembly’s action served as an important reminder of the strength of feeling that exists against the Conservative Party – and an example of how people can still organise collectively in the UK.

    Featured image via South East London People’s Assembly – screengrab 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The ‘War on the War on Motorists’ is already a car crash

    To describe Rishi Sunak’s premiership as a ‘car crash’ would be inaccurate, if only because the term implies a one-off event. To add to the ridiculousness, the PM and his few remaining friends in the media keep urging us to agree about how clever he is for creating these chronic collisions. The latest disaster in this ongoing fiasco is Sunak’s ‘War on the War on Motorists‘.

    Sunak versus safety

    The ‘war on the war on motorists’ has come about not because of some longstanding political opinion, but because Sunak saw some people complaining about 20mph zones and reckoned he could win over a few hundred votes.

    Essentially, this makes the Tory leader look like an ambulance-chasing lawyer – a man who is running after voters and claiming he shares their interests and always has done. While you can possibly win votes that way, it doesn’t seem like a practical means of running a country.

    People have pointed out that many do actually want 20mph zones – especially outside schools and homes:

    One commenter highlighted the fact that ‘motorists’ also spend a lot of their spare time not being motorists:

    The public versus public transport?

    Columnist Andrew Fisher made a very good point about car use versus public transport:

    Political editor Peter Walker elaborated on the situation we find ourselves in:

    Arguably, the past few governments (Labour included) haven’t shifted the balance towards public transport. Local transport in the UK ranks among the most expensive in Europe; rail fares are equally ridiculous. People below a certain age might not even realise that public transport is supposed to be cheaper than driving. The reason why it isn’t is the private companies who are using this public good as their own personal piggy bank.

    The war on the environment

    Several people have pointed out that the real war on motorists is the one being waged by Mother Nature:

    Given that Mother Nature has us significantly outgunned, what we really need are politicians with the sense to stop assaulting the environment:

    Another politician pointed out what we could achieve by enhancing public transport and making it easy for people to avoid driving everywhere:

    The War on the War on Motorists: whiplash politics

    Sunak is currently attending the annual Tory Party Conference in Manchester. Given that he’s facing criticism from everyone – including his own MPs – its unclear how long his War on the War on Motorists will survive. No one is quite sure what policies the PM will propose next week. However, while that’s no way to run a country, history has shown us that a Tory with no idea where they’re heading is preferable to a Tory who does.

    Featured image via Flickr – Number 10 cropped to 770 x 403 under licence CC BY 2.0

    By John Shafthauer

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • UK Authorities Prosecuted Just 11 Wealthy People for Tax Fraud Last Year

    HM Revenue & Customs investigations led to prosecutions against just 11 “wealthy” people last year, an investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and TaxWatch can reveal. Critics say the figure, obtained by freedom of information requests, suggests the UK tax inspector is doing too little to punish rich tax cheats at a time when the Treasury faces financial problems and millions of…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Sunak’s latest interview proved he has no answers – even with Kuenssberg finally asking questions

    Recent leaks suggest Rishi Sunak is going to cancel the HS2 link to Manchester. Given the intense speculation on HS2‘s future, the most obvious question on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg was always going to be ‘what’s going on?’. As ever, Sunak showed himself to be a man without answers:

    HS2

    As reported by the Manchester Evening News, Sunak refused to answer whether HS2 will make it all the way to the North. To be specific, he repeatedly refused to answer. To make things even more awkward, Sunak is literally in Manchester right now for the annual Tory Party conference. Kuenssberg asked him:

    We are sitting in Salford right next to Manchester. Yes or no: will HS2, high-speed rail, come to this part of the world?

    Slippery Sunak responded:

    Look, there’s already spades in the ground and we’re getting on with delivering it.

    He didn’t elaborate on whether these spades were actually being operated. When Kuenssberg pointed out she hadn’t asked him about his shovels, Sunak answered as follows (that’s ‘answered’ in the loosest sense of the word, obviously):

    I’m not going to comment on all this speculation. We’ve got a project, we’ve got spades in the ground, and we’re getting on with it but it’s right to focus on levelling up.

    Unexpectedly, Kuenssberg didn’t respond with her famous catchphrase – ‘I want to move on‘. Instead, she actually pressed him on the matter:

    Prime minister, can I just stop you there? You are the Prime Minister of this country.

    This is not asking you about speculation, you’re not a columnist, you’re not a backbencher with an axe to grind, you’re not someone from the rail industry, you are the prime minister of this country, this is your decision. Is this going to happen or not?

    Sunak once again didn’t answer:

    As I said, we’ve got space in the ground, I’m not going to comment on further speculation. But what I can tell you is we are absolutely committed to levelling up across this country.

    Just today, we’ve announced a new plan, a long term plan actually, to focus on people in towns. More live in towns than live in big cities in our country and they don’t get the attention that they deserve.

    And my view is we need to focus on the long term things that will make our towns better places to live, put local people in control and that’s why we’re backing them with a billion pounds of funding to help 55 towns across the country level up, better high streets, more security, less homelessness and making sure they protect civic assets

    It’s somewhat less than reassuring that the guy in charge of the country can’t confirm whether he is or is not going to build a massive railway. This lack of clarity has no doubt shaped the public’s perception of ‘Wriggly Rishi’.

    The voice of the people

    In another uncharacteristically good move, the BBC asked members of the public what they thought of Sunak and turned it into a word cloud. Would you be unsurprised to learn that it was primarily just the word ‘rich’?

    To be fair, it wasn’t solely the word ‘rich’ – it also contained synonyms like ‘wealthy’, ‘greed’, and ‘Conservative’.

    Sunak’s latest appearance gave people more to say about the man – none of it flattering:

    One comment was unfair in the sense that dictators generally have some semblance of a plan; Sunak has all the direction of a weather vane in a tumble dryer:

    Sunak’s ‘flip-flopping’ hasn’t been lost on the Tories’ big donors:

    At this point, Sunak is literally a laughing stock:

    A new BBC?

    Who can say what spurned Kuenssberg to actually do her job. Maybe she was left embarrassed by Victoria Derbyshire, who filled in for her last Sunday and showed everyone what a competent interviewer looks like? Maybe her trip to Manchester has got her feeling ‘mad for it’? Either way, we wouldn’t expect more going forwards.

    Kuenssberg didn’t go after Sunak because of a sudden desire to speak truth to power; she did so because Sunak is clearly PM in name only. How long he’ll hang on depends solely on how much he enjoys humiliation.

    Featured image via BBC – screengrab

    By John Shafthauer

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • BBC investigation finds body-worn cameras are ‘protecting the police’ rather than improving trust and transparency

    A BBC News investigation revealed that police officers are “widely” misusing body-worn cameras. In some cases, police turned the cameras off during uses of force, and in others officers shared footage from the cameras via WhatsApp. This led to suggestions that the cameras are undermining, rather than building, trust in the police.

    Selective use of body-worn cameras

    On 28 September, BBC News published a two-year investigation into the use of body-worn cameras by police across England and Wales. It found more than 150 reports of officers misusing the devices. They included:

    • Officers failing to switch on their cameras, or actively switching them off, when using force against people.
    • Forces deleting or failing to store crucial footage from body-worn cameras.
    • Individual officers sharing footage from their cameras in person, via social media, or on messaging apps.

    BBC News highlighted the case of Louisa and Yufial, who were prosecuted after allegedly abusing and attacking officers at a Black Lives Matter rally in London in May 2020. The siblings fought a two-year legal battle to obtain footage from the body-worn cameras of the officers in question.

    The footage revealed that an officer had struck Yufial, while another pushed Louisa. Police hadn’t initially disclosed this footage to the pair. At the appeal hearing, BBC News reported that the judge said:

    it seemed the prosecution had deliberately failed to disclose relevant information.

    Litany of misuse

    Noel Titheradge, who led the BBC‘s investigation, shared further examples of body-worn camera misuse on Twitter:

    The BBC investigation corroborated Louisa and Yufial’s experience of obstructions to obtaining footage from body-worn cameras. It reported one case in which two officers turned off their cameras whilst a man was punched five times.

    The force subsequently refused to provide the footage up to the point the cameras were switched off. It claimed that the recordings provided no “tangible benefit to the public”. The Information Commissioner, which is the ultimate arbiter of decisions on freedom of information requests, agreed with this statement.

    Disproportionate impact on Black and Asian people

    Action for Race Equality (ARE) responded to the investigation. The NGO said that the results would erode the public’s faith in policing even further:

    The news that footage is being grossly misused is deeply concerning. Public access to police body worn footage is already incredibly restricted, and officers having the ability to delete, edit, and misuse this footage will only further deplete the public’s trust and confidence in policing.

    This is particularly significant because policing organisations pushed the use of body-worn cameras in part as a means of building trust in policing. The Police Federation, for example, said a camera “increases transparency” and makes “officers more accountable”. A 2022 document from the National Police Chiefs’ Council echoed this. It said that the devices should “promote integrity and confidence in policing”.

    ARE went on to highlight how police misuse of body-worn cameras disproportionately affects Black and Asian people. With officers in England and Wales being five times more likely to use force against Black people, any discretionary decision by officers is statistically more likely to impact incidents involving the Black community.

    Helping the police ‘cover their backs’

    Back in 2016, Canary writer Emily Apple highlighted the problems of body-worn cameras. At a time when police forces were rapidly rolling the devices out to their officers, Apple said:

    police can also pick and choose when they turn their cameras on, so it will still not necessarily mean that the many incidences of police brutality will be recorded.

    This reflected wider anxieties about body cameras as a tool of state surveillance versus their utility in holding officers to account. Then, in 2020, a leaked Met Police memo said the cameras had recorded numerous instances of:

    poor communication, a lack of patience, [and] a lack of de-escalation before use of force is introduced.

    Officers’ discretion over using their body-worn cameras is therefore a mechanism for controlling public image. This is exacerbated by institutional support for the police’s position. Baroness Louise Casey, who led the Casey Review into behaviour and standards at the Metropolitan Police, was reported by BBC News as claiming that:

    many senior police officers believe body-worn video exists almost to cover their backs

    Yufiel agreed. He told the BBC that a body-worn camera is “labelled as protection for the public, but ultimately it protects the police”. Likewise, the Runnymede Trust, a racial equality think tank, described the BBC‘s findings as a:

    consistent pattern of police defending their own, covering up wrongdoing and active harm.

    Police apologists have claimed the BBC‘s investigation only uncovered a relatively few cases of body-worn camera misuse. Yet history has repeatedly belied the claim that there are just ‘few bad apples’ in policing – and it’s members of the public, not the police, who will suffer as a result.

    Featured image via Reveal Body Worn Camera Solutions/YouTube

    By Glen Black

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • GB News laughing at toothless Ofcom as Tory chair ’30p Lee’ set to interview Suella Braverman

    Not a week goes by without far-right foghorn amplifier GB News being in some sort of hot water. Now, after station bosses suspended two presenters for misogyny, broadcasting watchdog Ofcom is investigating.

    Ofcom also recently ruled against the channel for having two Conservative MPs interview a third Tory on their show. GB News‘ response? To laugh in the regulator’s face with yet another display of Conservative Party PR between the Tory chair ’30p Lee’ Anderson and home secretary Suella Braverman – because it knows it will get away with it.

    Laurence Fox: how could this possibly happen?

    As BBC News reported, GB News has once again caused uproar due to its presenters’ actions:

    Dan Wootton has been suspended from GB News following comments made on his show by Laurence Fox, who asked what “self-respecting man” would “climb into bed” with reporter Ava Evans.

    The broadcaster had earlier suspended Fox for his remarks about PoliticsJOE’s Evans during a live show.

    Fox’s comments were in response to assertions Evans made about men’s mental health during the BBC Politics Live show on Monday 25 September. Whilst Fox initially said that he stood “by every word of what I said”, he later caved and joined Wooton in apologising for their misogyny.

    Meanwhile, Evans told PoliticsJOE:

    For a long time that man [Fox] has said some pretty despicable things about women. I mean there’s the comments about asking a fellow journalist what colour knickers she’s wearing, or there’s another commentator where he put out a tweet being like ‘oh god you wouldn’t want to be her girlfriend’ [sic] or whatever…

    I just think it speaks to a wider power dynamic that is falling away now but definitely used to be there in the last few years. It’s like an antiquated practice of not being able to properly challenge a woman on her words and so just going for her level of attractiveness, or her ‘shagability’.

    GB News‘ boss has condemned both presenters. Of course, most people know Fox is a dickhead. However, Wooton also has a history of rampant misogyny:

    There’s also the not-so small matter of the recent Byline Times investigation into him over sexual abuse allegations:

    So, as one person asked on X:

    Of course, Fox and Wooton’s actions come against a backdrop of controversy for GB News.

    Ofcom: if at first you don’t succeed…

    Ofcom has launched an investigation into the pair’s comments – on top of the 12 investigations it’s currently running regarding the channel.

    As the Canary previously reported, the regulator recently ruled against GB News over two Tory MPs interviewing Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt on the channel. As we previously wrote, Ofcom said GB News breached part of its code regarding broadcasters presenting a wide range of opinions:

    That is: Tories were interviewing a Tory, and offering no alternative views.

    You know it’s bad when even Tory MPs are distancing themselves from GB News – or rather, pretending to – even after appearing repeatedly on the channel. Thank goodness for X community notes:

    But while Ofcom has ruled against GB News (and likely will in the case of Fox and Wooton), the regulator is still not addressing the elephant in the room.

    That elephant is nicely summed up by the following GB News show:

    Once again, people are outraged and calling for the regulator to act. However, Ofcom only actually ruled against GB News for failing to air alternative views. It didn’t rule against Tory MPs interviewing Tory MPs – despite what high-profile people like Carol Vorderman on X are saying:

    The ‘get out of broadcasting jail free card’ for GB News is that when these Tories interview other Tories, it’s classed as current affairs, not news (according to Ofcom, anyway). Therefore, they’re not breaching any rules. As some corporate journalists have pointed out, it’s almost like GB News is now staging the Braverman interview to purposefully taunt Ofcom:

    Or it’s just doing it for the clicks:

    Herein lies the problem.

    GB News: it’s not its right-wing views that are the problem

    If GB News wants to be a right-wing news channel, that’s up to it. The broadcaster allowing far-right hate-peddlers like Fox to spout what probably constitutes hate speech live on air is clearly unacceptable – and Ofcom should act. However, the regulator acting over the channel not presenting a balance of opinions is really neither here nor there, when it doesn’t address that elephant in the room.

    The channel exists to act as a PR service for the hard-right wing of the Tory Party. The things it presents as current affairs are simply Conservative Party political broadcasts. Yet due to Ofcom’s own preposterously complex rules, the channel can get away with it.

    We already have a broadcaster acting as a mouthpiece for the state (the BBC), thanks very much. The UK certainly doesn’t need the dystopian, Orwellian nightmare that is GB News acting as a marketing agency for the Tories. Yet Ofcom seems incapable of acting on this. Until it does, everything else is tokenistic – and the channel will continue to get away with it.

    Featured image via the Telegraph – YouTube, and Lee Anderson – Twitter 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • People’s Assembly has released the final details of its epic festival of Tory resistance

    The People’s Assembly is gearing up for its national demonstration and Festival of Resistance in Manchester. The group is holding the events during this year’s Conservative Party conference – and People’s Assembly is determined to make its supporters’ presence known to the Tories. The message will be clear: Tories out – now.

    People’s Assembly: back at the Tory Party conference

    It’s been over ten years since the People’s Assembly first launched with a letter in the Guardian. Its initial mandate was clear: an end to the then-coalition government’s austerity programme, and a reversal of its cuts. Its remit has since broadened.

    From protests on the rise in foodbank use to demanding a different kind of post-pandemic ‘new normal’, People’s Assembly has often been at the front of the UK’s political protest movement. Now, it’s once more got the Tory Party conference in its sights.

    The People’s Assembly has organised a national demonstration against the Tories on Sunday 1 October in Manchester. The protest will start at All Saints Park, Oxford Road, at 12pm. It will go directly past the Tory conference (where its likely the protest will be the nosiest), and end at the Castlefield Arena:

    People's Assembly national demo route

    Speakers at the demo will include:

    • National Union of Rail, Transport, and Maritime Workers (RMT) general secretary Mick Lynch.
    • National Education Union (NEU) general secretary Daniel Kebede.
    • Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) general secretary Kate Hudson.
    • Ellen Clifford from Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC).
    • Fran Heathcote, president of the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union.
    • Lindsey German from the Stop the War Coalition.

    People's Assembly national demo speakers

    Festival of Resistance

    The demo is part of a wider programme of events which the People’s Assembly is calling a ‘Festival of Resistance’. The four-day programme will see a wide range of talks, events, debates, and entertainment. Many of these will be held in a marquee at Piccadilly Gardens.

    One of the events is the ‘Stick it to the Tories Big Night Out’ on Saturday 30 September. Starting at 7:30pm at the Mechanics Institute, the evening will bring together comedy, music, and politics. It will feature:

    • Barbara Nice (comedian).
    • Laura Pidcock (People’s Assembly national secretary).
    • Barbarella (musician).
    • Gerry Potter (rebel poet).
    • Paul O’Connor (PCS senior national officer).
    • Steph Pike (rebel poet).
    • Jonathan Mayor (comedian).

    People's Assembly Festival of Resistance schedule

    You can find more details on some of the events here.

    Turning ‘anger into action’

    Paula Peters is a disability rights activist with DPAC. She said in a press release:

    The Tories are planning to cut the welfare state even further and ramp up poverty as a result. Join the People’s Assembly on Sunday 1st October in Manchester. Turn the anger into action. See you on the streets.

    Ben Sellers from the group Campaign for Trade Union Freedom added:

    The Government’s anti-strike legislation concerns us all. It’s part of a network of authoritarian measures to prevent us from fighting back. We must never allow that. Join the People’s Assembly demo at the Tory Party conference in Manchester on October 1st.

    Groups have been organising transport to the national demonstration. You can find out more here. People’s Assembly still needs volunteers to help steward the demonstration and to help with the Festival of Resistance. If you can support with this, get in touch via office(at)thepeoplesassembly.org.uk.

    Working-class people paying the price

    The People’s Assembly summed up by saying:

    From austerity to the cost of living crisis, it is all too clear that the only people paying for the Tories deliberate destruction of public services, welfare and communities are ordinary, working class people. This year alone we have seen food price inflation at 19.1% – it’s fastest pace in over 40 years. Coupled with falling wages, a massive rise in rents and energy bills at an all time high, people are struggling ahead of an already predicted harsh winter.

    In the meantime the Tories, and their financial backers, are enjoying one bonanza after another. Profits for energy companies are at an all time high, supermarkets have cashed in on the increase in food prices and the PM himself cannot go one week without benefitting from the decisions coming from Westminster. Despite their claims to be world beating, the only thing this party seems able to beat is the corruption, cronyism and callousness of their previous leaders.

    Within [the last week] Sunak has U-turned on climate pledges, forcing the public to once again shoulder the brunt of future damage arising from climate change.

    So, if you free from Saturday 30 September and want to stick it to the Tories – while also having some fun along the way – then People’s Assembly needs you.

    Featured image and additional images via the People’s Assembly

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Government greenlights climate-wrecking Rosebank oil and gas field

    On Wednesday 27 September, the UK government issued a license to the controversial and potentially disastrous Rosebank oil and gas field. The decision throws a spanner in the UK’s plans to reach its legally-binding net zero emissions target by 2050.

    Government approves climate-wrecking Rosebank

    Norwegian oil and gas giant Equinor has an 80% interest in the project. Israeli group Delek’s subsidiary Ithaca Energy holds the remainder. In a separate statement, the joint venture partners announced they would invest $3.8bn in the field’s development.

    The UK’s oil and gas regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority, granted the license for the two companies to develop the project for fossil fuel production.

    Campaigners have previously estimated that the enormous project – situated off the coast of Shetland in the North Sea – will produce over 500m barrels of oil over its lifetime. This would equate to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of the 28 lowest-income countries combined.

    Understandably, climate groups have expressed their disappointment and anger at the news. Climate Action Network UK (CAN-UK) highlighted the announcement in light of recent demonstrations that saw protestors in hundreds of cities across the world mobilise for an end to fossil fuels:

    Of course, climate activists weren’t going to just roll over at the news of Rosebank’s license approval. Campaign group Fossil Free London has called an emergency demonstration outside the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) offices:

    Net zero roll-back

    Naturally, the authorisation comes one week after the government diluted its net zero targets.

    On 20 September, Sunak declared that a ban on the sale of petrol and diesel cars would be pushed back from 2030 to 2035. In addition, he also announced an easing of energy efficiency targets for rental properties. This is paired with his plans to backtrack on making homeowners replace gas boilers with heat pumps.

    The UK government has maintained it must beef up energy security via continued production of fossil fuels. Specifically, it has argued the need to do so following the invasion of Ukraine by key producer Russia. Sunak claimed that the move would “ease the financial burden on the UK taxpayer”.

    As the Canary reported at the time, however:

    Sunak’s new climate policy timeline is a boon for the big polluter elite and the landlord class. It’s cold homes, soaring energy bills, and climate disasters for the rest.

    In other words, his net zero roll-backs were a gift to oil and gas goliaths and profiteering landlords. Crucially, the new policies would, in fact, do little for households facing astronomical energy bills. Instead, it could cost taxpayers more in the long-term. Naturally, energy giants have reported staggering profits throughout this crisis.

    Rosebank to blow past net zero targets

    Now, the government’s greenlighting of the Rosebank oil and gas field has added insult to injury. Green Party MP Caroline Lucas said of the news:

    The UK oil and gas regulator said that the decision to authorise new North Sea output had taken:

    net zero considerations into account throughout the project’s lifecycle

    However, an analysis by campaign group Uplift previously found that the Rosebank project would cause the industry to shoot past its carbon budget. The industry’s carbon budget is the limit on emissions that the government has set for the sector. These carbon budgets aim to ensure the country collectively reaches net zero emissions by 2050.

    Specifically, the research identified that between 2028 and 2038, Rosebank would contribute to pushing the industry past its carbon budget by 10%. This would increase to 40% above budget between 2038 and 2050.

    Moreover, before Rosebank’s approval, the government’s own independent climate advisory body has voiced its lack of confidence in the government’s plans. In June, the Climate Change Committee raised concerns about the government hitting its carbon budget targets. Already, its key strategy for meeting net zero – known as the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan – shows that it will fall short of its legally-binding emissions reductions between 2033 and 2037.

    Profits of oil companies above everyday people

    In March, United Nations head António Guterres called on wealthy nations to step up their action on the climate crisis. His plea came as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published its latest blistering assessment. The report made clear that new oil and gas projects would be incompatible with keeping the world beneath 1.5°c of warming.

    Yet since the report’s publication in March, the UK government has instead scaled back its climate action. Worse still, it has now permitted this gargantuan fossil fuel project.

    Greenpeace UK’s climate campaigner Philip Evans said of the news that:

    Sunak has proven once and for all that he puts the profits of oil companies above everyday people

    He added in a statement:

    We know that relying on fossil fuels is terrible for our energy security, the cost of living, and the climate.

    Just when you think Sunak’s government couldn’t stoop any lower on its climate commitments, it approves the enormous climate-wrecking Rosebank oil and gas field. In light of Sunak’s recent record on the environment, perhaps this shouldn’t come as any surprise.

    Feature image via Sky News/Youtube screengrab. 

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Water companies ordered by regulator Ofwat to cut bills due to poor performance

    On 26 September, Ofwat – the water services regulation authority – ordered water companies in England and Wales to return a combined £114m to customers for failing to meet performance targets.

    Companies fell short in terms of basics like customer satisfaction, pollution, and improving infrastructure. The regulator’s decision also comes amid a long-running scandal over privatised water firms pumping raw sewage into waterways.

    Ofwat: water firms fall short

    Ofwat usually ranks water providers as ‘leading’, ‘average’, or ‘lagging’. However, this year no company achieved a place in the leading category. 
    Of the 17 firms in England and Wales, seven fell into the bottom rank. These were Thames Water, Yorkshire Water, Anglian Water, Dŵr Cymru, Southern Water, Bristol Water and South East Water. The list of companies ordered to give money back to customers is longer still: 
    • Affinity Water
    • Anglian Water
    • Dŵr Cymru
    • Hafren Dyfrdwy
    • Northumbrian Water
    • SES Water
    • South East Water
    • South West Water
    • Southern Water
    • Thames Water
    • Yorkshire Water
    Thames Water, in particular, was ordered to return the highest amount at £101m. This is despite having recently secured a £750m cash injection from shareholders, allowing it to narrowly dodge renationalisation. Other firms will still be allowed to put their prices up next year. 
    Ofwat chief executive David Black said in a statement:

    The targets we set for companies were designed to be stretching – to drive improvements for customers and the environment.

    However, our latest report shows they are falling short, leading to £114 million being returned to customers through bill reductions.

    While that may be welcome to billpayers, it is very disappointing news for all who want to see the sector do better.

    Government oversight?

    The government announced back in July that any company and individual polluting rivers and other ecosystems would be liable for unlimited fines.

    Regarding Ofwat’s findings, environment secretary Thérèse Coffey said:

    Today’s Ofwat report is extremely disappointing… The fact that not a single water company is classified as ‘leading’ is unacceptable.

    We have written to the CEOs of every water company in the lowest category of today’s report and my ministerial team and I will meet them in person to scrutinise their improvement plans.

    She went on to add that:

    billpayers should know we require the worst performers to return money directly to customers through their bills.

    However, at odds with Coffey’s ‘scrutiny’, the Tories themselves have a distinct track record of spending public money on waterway pollution measures. Back in April, the environment secretary announced that public money would be used to fix the sewage-dumping mess caused by these very same privatised water companies.

    Likewise, less than a month ago the government announced plans to strip back waterway protections for housing construction. This would also land the taxpayer with the bill to double investment to £280m, simply to counter the additional discharge from the new homes.

    Small comforts

    As such, Coffey’s promise of oversight and reduced bills rings somewhat hollow. Both water companies and the government have demonstrated their willingness to use public money to plug holes in privatised infrastructure.

    So, while some customers might see a reduction in their bills, it’ll be little comfort if their money is still being used to fix the water companies’ problems through taxes rather than direct payments. Either way, England and Wales still lose out every day whilst their water is in private hands.

    Featured image via Wikipedia/Ofwat, resized to 1910*1000, liscensed for the public domain. 

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • New research sheds light on increase in early deaths due to cost-of-living crisis

    The UK’s inflation-fuelled cost-of-living crisis is set to “cut lives short” and “significantly widen the wealth-health gap”. That’s according to a study published by the BMJ Public Health journal on 25 September.

    Modelling conducted for the study predicted that the proportion of people “dying before their time” (under the age of 75) will rise by nearly 6.5% due to the sustained period of high prices. UK inflation unexpectedly slowed in August to 6.7% from a high of 11.1%, but remains the highest in the G7.

    Cost of living: hitting the poorest hardest

    Inevitably, the study forecast that the most deprived households will experience four times the number of extra deaths compared to the wealthiest households. The poorest will also have to spend a larger proportion of their income on energy.

    The researchers studied the impact of inflation on death rates in Scotland in 2022-3. They then added analysis with and without cost-of-living mitigation measures such as government support to help cut household bills. The collected data was used to model various potential future outcomes on life expectancy and inequalities for the UK as a whole.

    Without any mitigation measures, the model found that inflation could increase deaths by 5% in the least-deprived areas. That number shot up to 23% for the most deprived. However, it dropped to 2% and 8% respectively with mitigation.

    The overall average was around 6.5%. Life expectancy would also fall in each case.

    ‘Insufficient’ public policies

    The researchers said:

    The mortality impacts of inflation and real-terms income reduction are likely to be large and negative, with marked inequalities in how these are experienced.

    They also added that:

    Implemented public policy responses are not sufficient to protect health and prevent widening inequalities.

    The BMJ Public Health study echoed findings from earlier in 2023 from the Resolution Foundation regarding the disproportionate impact on lower earners. It found that 65% of the poorest fifth of people were left with no savings at all. This was because they spent more on everyday costs such as food and housing than higher earners.

    Those who were reliant on government support were the most affected, as successive Tory governments have repeatedly cut benefit rates in real terms. Likewise, polling commissioned by the BBC found that 32% of social housing tenants had fallen behind with utility bills in the previous six months during the cost of living crisis.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Downing guns shows armed police want ‘impunity’ to kill, critics claim

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) charged an unnamed police officer on 20 September with the murder of Chris Kaba. However, following the murder charge, some 70 armed officers in the Metropolitan Police reportedly refused to carry firearms. They claimed they were “understandably anxious” as a result of the decision. By 25 September, that number had increased to more than 100, out of 2,500 armed Met officers. 

    Outside of the force, many people viewed the cops’ actions as a sign of the impunity with which armed cops expect to operate:

    This view was thrown into sharp relief by the response of Suella Braverman. The home secretary announced on 24 September that she would launch an inquiry into armed policing as a result of the murder charge. However, she also stated that officers:

    mustn’t fear ending up in the dock for carrying out their duties

    Police monitoring group Netpol described Braverman’s plan as an attempt to “offer firearms officers impunity”:

    Others shared similar views:

    On 24 September, the Home Office wrote to the Ministry of Defence for help due to the number of officers standing down. In a process known as Military Aid to Civil Authorities (MACA), the Home Office asked for military personnel to “provide routine counter-terrorism contingency support to the Metropolitan Police” if necessary.

    However, at the time of writing, the Met Police had dropped the request. In return, Netpol suggested the request was made to “heighten the sense of a crisis” and “undermine the prosecution of Chris Kaba’s killer”.

    Operating like a gang

    The response by firearms officers to the charge, and the Home Office’s response to their actions, appeared to highlight the power dynamics at play. In a thread on Twitter, social commentator Michael Morgan pointed out that the events have confirmed the findings of the Casey Review:

    In March 2023, baronness Louise Casey published her final report into misconduct within the Met. The review was triggered after serving Met officer Wayne Couzens murdered Sarah Everard. Couzens was a firearms officer at the time of the murder.

    The Casey Review found “serious concerns” in the culture of two of the Met’s firearms units. In particular, it found that those officers permitted to carry firearms held “undue influence and elevated reputations” within the Specialist Firearms Command (MO19) unit. One anonymous officer described the situation as a “boys’ club”, while another said that challenging the wrong person could leave them feeling “isolated”.

    Casey found that another unit with armed police – the Parliamentary and Diplomatic Protection (PaDP) unit – suffered similar problems. The review described the PaDP as a “dark corner of the Met where poor behaviours can easily flourish”. It also found that senior PaDP officers wanted to “avoid cracking down” on bad behaviour by officers.

    The review even covered the exact situation that occurred following the Kaba-related murder charge. Writing of MO19, Casey said:

    This has led to a widely held view in the Command and in the rest of the Met that firearms officers ‘need to be allowed’ to bend or break the rules because they are volunteers who could at any point decide not to carry a firearm or ‘hand in their blue card’.

    Michael Morgan said that the Casey Review revealed MO19 in particular as operating like a gang.

    Police go on ‘strike’

    This most recent incident is not the first time that firearms officers have gone on ‘strike’ by downing their guns. In 2004, roughly 120 officers said they’d stop using their guns after the Met suspended two officers for killing Harry Stanley. Neil Sharman and Kevin Fagan shot and killed Stanley after they allegedly mistook a table leg for a shotgun. The CPS ultimately dropped its charges against Sharman and Fagan.

    Police in the UK like to claim a principle of ‘policing by consent’. However, it seems this doesn’t mean ‘by consent of the public’. Instead, it is the consent of an entrenched minority who will do what they can to avoid accountability. This is simply another example of why, as Canary writer Maryam Jameela wrote, the Met is beyond reform and we must do away with it altogether.

    Featured image via Metropolitan Police/YouTube

    By Glen Black

  • A London monument was the scene of a protest against a fossil fuel conference

    Activists scaled a London monument during the Changing of the Guard procession as part of a protest targeting an upcoming fossil fuel conference. Fossil Free London scaled the Wellington Arch on Friday 22 September, unfurling banners while troops on horseback passed by.

    Fossil fuel conference dressed up as ‘energy intelligence’

    The Energy Intelligence Forum is the world’s largest annual gathering of energy companies. It’s happening from 17 to 19 October. The forum says on its website that:

    In 2023 the Energy Intelligence Forum returns to London – bringing together decision-makers, thought-leaders and innovators from the worlds of energy, finance, politics and business to debate, discuss and develop sustainable solutions to the world’s energy challenges.

    Hosted by Energy Intelligence, the leading energy information company, the Forum presents opportunities for high-level networking and discussion with the industry’s leading executives and experts.

    Some of the discussions at the conference include debating net zero – something Rishi Sunak will probably appreciate:

    Meanwhile, the guests include bosses from notorious fossil fuel companies such as Shell, TotalEnergies, and Saudi Aramco. CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company Sultan Al Jaber is also speaking. Without irony, he’s also president of the COP28 climate conference. Compounding all this is the attendance of the UK government, with UK energy minister Graham Stuart MP representing it.

    One of the problems with the conference is that it will be discussing topics including the viability of “clean energy“, while having fossil fuel companies in attendance. As the Canary‘s Hannah Sharland previously wrote, corporations like Shell and TotalEnergies are claiming to be transitioning to renewables. However, in reality they’re doing nothing of the sort. Sharland wrote about a Greenpeace report which found that:

    in 2022 these energy majors generated only 0.3 percent of their total production through renewables. The remaining 99.7 percent came from oil and gas production. On top of this, Greenpeace highlighted that there is a “one-sided fossil dominance of investments”.

    Specifically, the group identified that the companies funnelled 92.7% of investments towards their fossil fuel operations in 2022. Conversely, they directed just 7.3% towards sustainable energy and low-carbon power production.

    It’s no surprise, then, that the upcoming London event used to be called the “Oil and Money conference“. So, on 22 September activists from campaign group Fossil Free London showed their anger at the conference taking place.

    ‘Oily money out’ of London

    The Wellington Arch is just a few minutes’ walk from the Intercontinental Hotel on Park Lane. It will be hosting the Energy Intelligence Forum. So, Fossil Free London chose to adorn the arch with banners while the Changing of the Guard took place:

    A protest by Fossil Free London at Wellington Arch

    a protest by Fossil Free London at Wellington Arch

    The stunt is the latest in a series of protests by Fossil Free London. As Sky News reported, on 31 August the group disrupted a performance of Romeo and Juliet at the Sadler’s Wells Theatre. It was over Barclay’s sponsorship of the venue. The bank has financed $150bn into fossil fuels since 2015.

    Then, Fossil Free London also disrupted science minister Michelle Donelan’s speech at the CogX AI festival, over Shell’s sponsorship of it, as well as the government’s plans to open a new oil field:

     

    On the group’s action at the Wellington Arch, Joanna Warrington of Fossil Free London said in a press release:

    The bosses of these giant oil companies will be schmoozing with the president of COP28 and the UK’s climate minister at the Oil & Money summit. It’s an oily stitch-up!

    The fossil fuel industry sits at the polluted heart of the climate emergency. We want them and their oily money out.

    Out of our politics. Out of COP28. Out of our lives and futures. That’s why we’re targeting the biggest annual gathering of fossil fuel companies and inviting everyone concerned about the climate emergency to join our disruption at Oily Money Out.

    We will not sit by as oil companies destroy our communities and burn our only home for the sake of profit.

    Fossil fuel companies: not to be trusted

    As Sharland previously summed up for the Canary:

    you can’t put fossil fuel companies in charge of the greenhouse. Invariably… their relentless pursuit of profit means that they only know how to turn up the heat and set the world on fire.

    So, Fossil Free London is right to start its protests to the Energy Intelligence Forum now – and it will likely stage more of them at the conference itself.

    Featured image and additional images via Fossil Free London

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Welsh independence march sees 10,000 people pack Bangor, calling for an indy Cymru

    Yet another Welsh independence march has attracted crowds of around 10,000 people, showing the growing strength of feeling over the issue. On Saturday 23 September, YesCymru and All Under One Banner (AUOB) Cymru’s sixth March for Independence was held in the city of Bangor.

    Welsh independence movement out in force again

    As the Canary has previously reported, people have been holding independence marches in Wales for several years. One in October 2022 attracted around 10,000 people. It appears that support for independence has been growing as time goes by. In 2019, around 21% of people supported an independent Wales. Now, the latest polling shows this is up to 33%.

    With that in mind, the YesCymru/AUOBCymru march on 23 September was a well-attended and colourful display of Welsh cultural identity:

    People on the Welsh independence march in Bangor Wales

    More people on the Welsh independence march in Wales

    It was also a strong call for people to join the independence movement:

    People marched through the streets of Bangor:

    As the Canary previously reported, a 10-metre-long red dragon, created by the artist-led organisation Small World Theatre, was leading them:

    After the march, the crowd listened to speeches in the shadow of the city’s Cathedral. These included video messages of support from vice president of Sinn Féin and the first minister designate in the North of Ireland Michelle O’Neill, and Dolors Feliu, President of the ANC (Assemblea Nacional Catalana).

    Wales: ‘on a journey to its rightful place in the world’

    Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth said in his speech:

    Once, the idea of independence was ridiculed, but now it is a prominent part of our national political discourse. I am convinced that only the people of Wales can build a fairer nation, and spur us to be much more ambitious in order to secure the future of our children and grandchildren.

    While the forces of Westminster are trying their best to stop us, they cannot stop a nation that is on a journey towards its rightful place in the world. And we all need to talk and discuss the potential of independence with our friends and colleagues who show curiosity. Convincing them that independence is the only way to ensure success for this part of the earth that is so dear to us all.

    Actress Sera Cracroft also addressed the crowd, adding:

    The March for Independence was an unforgettable event. The Dragon is a symbol of our fiery spirit and our unwavering commitment to an independent Wales. We are all determined that Wales is given the right to shape its own path towards independence and create a better country for all.

     

    Following the rally, an afternoon of folk singing was held at Tafarn y Glôb in Upper Bangor. Meanwhile the ‘Independence Gig’ in Pontio – featuring Fleur De Lys, Tara Bandito, 3 Hwr Doeth, and Maes Parcio – sold out:

    Beware the yoons

    Overall, CEO of YesCymru Gwern Gwynfil summed the situation up in Nation.Cymru:

    one in three in Wales in favour of independence, up from one in ten just a decade ago. A trend which comfortably puts us on two in three in favour within another decade.

    Some data also suggests that there are a further one in four in Wales already supportive of independence but only if Scotland becomes independent…

    But why wait? Why do we in Wales have to seek Scottish consent to support our own independence? Are we so downtrodden that we need a guide to point us in the direction we know we should be going? If you are one of the quarter of the population who would reassess support for independence if Scotland leaves, reassess it now – what Scotland does should not impact your decisions about your future and your nation. Why wait? The UK is diminishing rapidly, it offers Wales nothing.

    Of course, the challenge with any nation’s independence from the UK is the Westminster government and its associated ‘yoons’. As we’ve seen in Scotland, any attempt by the people to have autonomy from the UK will be actively opposed. So, Welsh independence is a long way off yet. However, the turnout in Bangor is a good indication of the direction of travel Wales is currently headed in.

    Featured image via YesCymru/AUOBcymru, and additional images via Andy Clarke

    By Steve Topple

  • New research highlights strong correlations between race and class and accessibility to public footpaths

    A new report by the Ramblers, a walking charity, has laid out in granular detail the race and class privileges of access to nature. In particular, the paper revealed that the whitest areas of England and Wales contain 144% more footpaths than the most ethnically diverse areas. Furthermore, modern housing developments are only making the situation worse.

    Old, wealthy, healthy and white

    The Ramblers published Who has a public right of way? on 20 September using research by the New Economics Foundation (NEF). The organisation said it’s likely the first systematic neighbourhood-level study of access to public rights of way (PRoWs) and open access land in England and Wales.

    Having mapped out over 140,000 miles of existing footpaths across the two nations, the NEF measured them against the centre of each postcode. It then determined approximate travel times from each postcode to the closest PRoW. It used 800m – or ten minutes of walking time – as a benchmark for accessibility.

    The report’s conclusions were stark:

    ‘Who has a right of way in England and Wales today?’. The answer, in the simplest of terms, is the old, the wealthy, the healthy, and the white.

    The findings included the following:

    • The least deprived areas have 80% greater PRoW provision than the most deprived.
    • The whitest areas have 144% greater PRoW provision than the most ethnically diverse.
    • The areas with the most health problems (as measured by heart attack prevalence) have the lowest PRoW provision.
    • The areas with the highest number of people over 65 had more than twice the amount of footpaths than areas with the least number of people under 65.

    It noted that, given the close relationship between race and economic deprivation in the UK, these findings are “unsurprising”.

    The NEF’s data also showed that new housing developments have exacerbated the problem. Estates built between 1965 and 1972 have 40% better access to PRoWs within a ten-minute walk than those built after 2000. While accessibility has steadily dropped since the 1965-72 peak, it dropped off significantly in the 2000s. The Ramblers said that the research showed this:

    is statistically correlated with a decline in the green space visitation rates of the residents, even after controlling for other key factors influencing visitation rates.

    Right to roam

    Tables listing the ten local authorities with the highest and lowest number of footpaths show how access differs from region to region. In nine of the top ten local authority areas, everyone is able to reach a PRoW of three kilometres or more within 400m or a five-minute walk. Meanwhile, fewer than half the people living in nine out of the ten bottom local authorities have similar access.

    Norwich is an extreme outlier. It sits at the bottom of the local authorities list and offers just 6.02% of its population five-minute access to a footpath that’s three kilometres or longer. Furthermore, the Ramblers’ report states people in the city have just 129m of PRoW within a ten-minute walk. Right to Roam Norwich, which campaigns for better public access to the land, told the Canary:

    This latest study is disappointing but not at all surprising. Despite sitting in the middle of the Broads National Park, public access to land and waterways in Norwich is abysmally poor. The knock-on effects of this on people’s mental and physical health, alongside our disconnect with nature, is all too clear. This study confirms what we have experienced to be true and people are ready and waiting for things to change.

    Norwich is also a very disconnected city in terms of public transport links to the countryside. There are few services running regular buses outside of the city and those that do operate so infrequently that planning a same day return with a walk in between is nigh on impossible.

    The NEF’s data also corresponds to similar research by the national Right to Roam campaign. The Canary previously reported that 92 constituencies in England and Wales have no right-to-roam pathways at all, while a further 117 have a right to roam on less than one hectare. These areas broadly corresponded to the most ethnically diverse regions.

    Doubling footpaths, abolishing footpaths

    The Ramblers said that:

    doubling the average length of paths in a neighbourhood would result in an additional annual 78.5 million walks in nature across England and Wales

    To achieve this, it recommended two solutions. First is the recovery of lost footpaths, which would add an average of 38% more PRoW across England and Wales, with the most economically deprived areas benefitting the most. Second, the Ramblers called for investment in creating new footpaths to double average length of footpaths. The organisation estimated this would cost £650m a year.

    Meanwhile, Right to Roam Norwich offered the Canary another alternative:

    While the introduction of stronger planning rules to ensure new housing developments have access to local paths would be a step in the right direction, we believe the only way to ensure equality of access to land is by introducing a Right to Roam Reform, similar to that which has been enjoyed by Scotland for the past 20 years.

    Scotland’s laws on land access mean the public is able to responsibly use almost all land and inland waterways for recreational purposes.

    Disrupt tradition

    The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Reconnecting people with the English and Welsh landscape could be the change to turn the nature crisis around. Or, at the very least, it might benefit individual physical and mental health. That could be done through improving PRoWs, or by abolishing the need for footpaths in the first place by introducing a right to roam.

    Whatever the solution, it’s clear that some sort of land justice is needed immediately. What’s more, any potential solution needs to focus on disrupting the age-old connections between whiteness, wealth, and accessibility.

    Featured image via Colin Smith/Flickr

    By Glen Black

  • While management hide, students occupy part of Brighton University campus in solidarity with staff

    Throughout the summer, Canary has documented this ongoing crisis within universities and higher education. Now, as the new academic year gets underway, it appears that the recurring theme of chaos within British universities at the hands of incompetent senior management teams (SMT) will continue. The abhorrent treatment of staff and students at my home institution, Brighton University (UOB), is a prime example of this. In fact, students have started an occupation due to the situation.

    Higher education: a bleak-looking new academic year

    Across higher education, the University and College Union (UCU) has been fighting back against management imposing pay cuts, as well as the dire working conditions its members have to tolerate.

    Since April 2023, actions have included a Marking and Assessment Boycott (MAB), strike action (with an indefinite strike currently in its 12th week at Brighton), occupations, and large-scale protests. The UCU has also announced that staff at 140 universities will strike from 25 to 29 September. This will disrupt freshers week for incoming students.  

    At Brighton, with the loss of over 100 academics due to redundancies and subsequent resignations, the new academic year is looking bleak. With less expertise, larger class sizes, and more staff expected to take extended sick leave due to chronic stress, the fight for our education continues. Now, students have started another occupation. 

    Occupation 2.0 at Brighton University: Pavilion Parade

    In the early hours of the morning on Monday 18 September, a group of anonymous students (associated with the group UOB Solidarity) occupied the Pavilion Parade campus building in the city centre of Brighton. This was once home to the humanities courses. However, management is now selling it off – citing cuts as an excuse. So, students reclaimed it as an autonomous space for them and the local community.

    Once again, the students should be commended on their bravery. Since the start of the occupation, they have been confronted with excessive force not only from university security, but also Sussex Police. They stated to the Canary that:

    The students in the building are all currently homeless, and hope that this occupation will draw attention to the rising rates of homeless students in the city as it becomes increasingly gentrified and education becomes more privatised.

    The response from the university security and Sussex police has been appalling – yet unsurprising.

    On Tuesday [19 September] – the planned ‘grand opening’ of the squatted community centre to the public – Brighton University security blocked the gates and prevented anyone from entering or leaving the building.

    Students left in ‘precarious conditions’

    Then, as the students noted, the university took things up a notch:

    Later in the day, fencing was installed around the perimeter of the building, in an attempt to prevent people from jumping the main fence to gain entry. Meanwhile, security guards are stationed at the gate, blocking access. On Wednesday [20 September], we were visited by contractors who have been employed to replace the fencing with wooden boards. Upon arrival, they were shocked to find they had been hired to board up peoples’ home. As of yet, they have not come back.

    Whilst those of us in the building continue to slip in and out past security in ever creative and precarious ways, the building is largely inaccessible to the public and so an inadequate community space. This is something we hope to change in the coming days.

    The occupiers concluded by saying:

    Whilst the university spends thousands on round-the-clock security and excessive fencing, it continues to make cuts across to board, and students live in increasingly precarious conditions.

    After UOB Solidarity gave the Canary this statement, the situation escalated further.

    Contractors have now installed wooden boards around the perimeter of the occupation. This has raised a lot of safety concerns for the occupiers. These boards went up very quickly, with no evidence of a formal risk assessment in case of a fire.

    UOB solidarity have also said that there has also been another incident of security assaulting an occupier. Their head and neck were pressed against a fence by the security guard’s leg. It choked them and hurt their head. Security have stated that they are ‘following orders’, implying that this type of action is being sanctioned by security.

    Even more cuts at Brighton University

    Since May, the Canary has reported not only the loss of over 100 academics at Brighton University, but also management closing the Brighton Centre of Contemporary Art. This was to the dismay of both locals and the wider arts community. Now, the university has said it’s shutting seven out of the 16 Centres of Research and Knowledge Exchange (COREs).

    These centres are vital for an exciting and dynamic research culture at Brighton. They help forge international links with other institutions, which brings about great opportunities for academics. Moreover, doing a PhD is a lonely endeavour, and the COREs provide post-graduate researchers (PGRs) with a much-needed community.

    Bella Tomsett is a PGR who was a member of two of the cores which the SMT are now closing. She told the Canary:

    As a PhD student in my first year, the CORE’s I joined have been instrumental in supporting to connect with other researchers in similar fields and making me feel that I am part of a research community. CORE events gave me opportunities to talk about my work, receive feedback, and expand my outlook on my research topic.

    Now, both COREs I belong to are being shut down, and with them, the communities they enable.

    I know university management says we still have Research Excellence Groups (REGs). But I have been only able to identify and join one REG relevant to me, which was somewhat active this year, and both its organisers are now leaving the university due to the redundancies, so that hardly inspires confidence.

    Management told us at the start of this year that ensuring a positive research culture at the university was a priority, but it’s hard to see how this can be the case when they appear to be systematically stripping the university of all those things which a research community make.

    Management’s position is now untenable

    Since the start of the redundancies dispute, the SMT has consistently neglected PGRs. Problems include the loss of supervisors, suspended Annual Progression Reviews, visa uncertainty for international researchers, cancelled visas, and now the disbanding of our communities. The university that we initially joined is unrecognisable.

    What makes this situation worse is that if PGRs need an extension for their PhD submission, the university will not waive the fees. After all the SMT has put PGRs through these last few months, it now expects us to foot the bill for the chaos that it caused.

    While PGRs were appalled at this news, it was not necessarily a surprise.

    This decision came from the same management team that have avoided public scrutiny by deleting their X (formerly known as Twitter) accounts. While they were deducting 100% of the wages from staff taking part in the MAB to starve them back to work, pro vice chancellor Rusi Jaspal posted pictures sipping cocktails during his holiday abroad.

    At no point has the SMT been accountable for the turmoil that is ongoing at Brighton University. It is becoming increasingly clear that their position is untenable. So long as this SMT is running Brighton, the future of our university is not safe.

    We need to start seeing resignations from those at the top. It is only right that it begins with the captain of this sinking ship, our vice chancellor Debra Humphris. 

    Featured image via UOB Solidarity

    By Steve Topple

  • Welsh government follows its Scottish counterparts in opposing the anti-boycott bill

    The Welsh government has announced that is formally opposing the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill. The legislation, better known as the ‘anti-boycott bill’, aims to stop movements like Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) influencing public bodies to join in. However, the Welsh government is recommending that Wales‘ Senedd withhold its consent – following on from the Scottish government making the same decision.

    The anti-boycott bill

    As the Canary previously reported, the anti-boycott bill has been controversial. Middle East Eye noted that:

    If passed, the bill would prohibit procurement and investment decisions made by public bodies that are “influenced by political or moral disapproval of foreign state conduct”.

    The bill sets out that the government can “specify a country or territory” for which the bill “does not apply”.

    However, the text explicitly states that such exemptions “may not specify” decisions or considerations “relating specifically or mainly to Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, or the Occupied Golan Heights”.

    Such public bodies include local councils and universities. As general secretary of Unite the Union Sharon Graham pointed out, the bill will specifically affect the Local Government Pension Scheme. She noted:

    This is not the government’s money. It represents the deferred wages of our members, and they have every right to say how they want it invested and to demand divestment from companies complicit in attacks on workers and communities.

    Moreover, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) pointed out that there was a “gagging clause” in the bill. This would mean public bodies would neither be able to “advocate” for or even discuss movements like BDS.

    Strong opposition away from Westminster

    Opposition to the bill has been strong. In August, the Scottish government formally opposed it. It stated that:

    We are rightly proud of those in Scotland who took a stand against apartheid [in South Africa]. Under the provisions of this bill, many of them would have been silenced. For a government to outlaw the expression of ideas different to its own is wholly unjustifiable and entirely incompatible with the notion that we live in a functioning democracy.

    Now, the Welsh government has done the same.

    In a memorandum, the Welsh government recommended that the Senedd “rejects the proposals and withholds its consent” for the anti-boycott bill. Specifically, it noted that the bill was “disproportionate and unnecessary”. Rebecca Evans is the Welsh minister for finance and local government who wrote the memorandum. She said in it that:

    I cannot recommend consent is given whilst questions remain as to the compatibility of this Bill with convention rights and international law. In addition, I note that there has been widespread criticism of this Bill from amongst the legal and academic community, in relation to the way it has been drafted and how it is intended to operate in practice. I share those concerns and it is imperative that the UK Government deals with them during the scrutiny of the Bill in the UK Parliament.

    This follows the Trades Union Congress (TUC) passing a motion at its annual congress regarding the bill. As the Morning Star reported, the TUC delegates agreed that, specifically concerning Israel:

    any attempt to delegitimise the Palestinian call for BDS and to suggest that Palestinians should be denied the right to appeal to people of conscience for support, must be rejected.

    A ‘threat to democratic freedoms’

    The PSC has welcomed the Welsh government’s decision. It said in a press release that:

    All this follows months of campaigning by PSC and a coalition of more than 70 civil society organisations to demand the Welsh government and Senedd oppose the bill. Welsh Senedd members, including the leader of the governing Welsh Labour Party Mark Drakeford, were lobbied to oppose the bill as an attack on freedom of expression and the right of devolved administrations and public bodies to make ethical decisions around investment and procurement.

    Director of PSC Ben Jamal said:

    This principled decision by the Welsh Government is the latest blow to this pernicious bill. The Welsh Government has rightly identified the incompatibility of the anti-boycott bill with conventions of rights and international law.

    This decision will add further weight to the growing opposition to this Bill – in the UK Parliament, Scottish government, across civil society and amongst the general public. We urge all of those who recognise the threat the anti-boycott bill poses to democratic freedoms to ramp up the pressure on MPs to ensure it is defeated when it goes back to Parliament for its next reading.

    So far, Labour has only partially come out against the anti-boycott bill. While it has said that it opposes BDS as a policy, the party said that the bill is “deeply flawed and will not address the problem it rightly seeks to solve”.

    The Green Party is yet to take a collective stance on the bill. It is set to vote on it during its autumn conference. The party’s only MP, Caroline Lucas, called the anti-boycott bill:

    a major attack on freedom of expression, an erosion of fundamental democratic principles and a genuine threat to climate and human rights campaigns.

    Featured image via the Left Berlin – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

  • Oxford NHS just re-gaslighted the entire ME community – and a charity rolled over and took it

    Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has issued an apology – of sorts – to charity the ME Association. It’s over an offensive job advert that angered people living with the chronic neuroimmune disease myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). However, Oxford NHS’s ‘apology’ is barely that – and has actually done little more than re-gaslight a whole group of chronically ill disabled people.

    Oxford NHS: one advert igniting a whole community

    The Canary has been documenting the controversy over Oxford NHS’s job advert. It’s hiring a clinical psychologist. The role will be working in the ME service, and the renal and transplant medicine service. However, Oxford NHS said in the advert (since altered) that the role would involved working with patients who have:

    difficulties in understanding (such as cognitive deficits, or unconscious denial of psychological conflicts), or overcoming communication difficulties with patient who are hostile, antagonistic, highly anxious or psychotic.

    It would also involve dealing with:

    verbal abuse and risk of physical aggression (for example from people with behavioural problems or enduring mental illness).

    Of course, it goes without saying that people with ME aren’t ‘hostile’, ‘antagonistic’, ‘verbally abusive’, or ‘physically aggressive’ – generally because they live with an energy-limiting chronic illness that barely lets them do things like wash up or go out for a coffee, let alone kick off at psychologists.

    Enter the ME Association

    In short, as I previously wrote, Oxford NHS’s overall thinking implied:

    that ME patients are ill because, at least in part, their illness is psychosomatic (“unconscious denial of psychological conflicts”) – and this needs to be clinically psychologised out of them.

    So, the ME Association got involved. The charity wrote to Oxford NHS asking it to change the advert to “remove the offensive language”. Consultant clinical neuropsychologist at Oxford Dr Simon Prangnell replied to the ME Association. He said that the wording that caused offense was not about people with ME. It was there in case the post holder had to respond to “emergency situations not necessarily within their usual service”.

    This still wasn’t good enough for the ME Association – and rightly so. It then wrote to the boss of the NHS trust. Now, Oxford NHS has replied – saying ‘sorry’, noting that it has changed the advert and “revised the wording”. And the new wording must be good, because the ME Association said that it will be writing back to “thank them for taking this action”. Surely, Oxford NHS must have got it right this time? Yes?

    No, of course it bloody well didn’t.

    Rewording, but still saying, the same shit

    The Oxford NHS ad for a clinical psychologist still states, in relation to ME patients, that the post holder will have to deal with people who are:

    highly emotionally charged (such as eliciting/discussing experiences of trauma or childhood abuse), and which may require managing difficulties in understanding (such as cognitive deficits, or unconscious denial of psychological conflicts)

    And that the person will need to be:

    Skilled at communicating with patients who may at times present as hostile or who are highly anxious or psychotic.

    All Oxford NHS has done is put the part about patients being ‘verbally abusive’ or ‘physically aggressive’ in the context of:

    exceptional circumstance (for example, when working with a person experiencing a mental health crisis or responding to an urgent / emergency situation)

    So, people living with ME still:

    • Have unconscious denial of psychological conflicts – implying that ‘the illness is all in people’s heads’.
    • Are “hostile”, “highly anxious”, and/or “psychotic” – implying that ‘the illness…’ etc etc.

    Moreover, they’ve had some “childhood trauma” which is also causing their ME or making it worse. Although they may not remember it (probably because it never bloody happened), it is definitely somewhere at the root of their post-viral illness and the multitude of symptoms this causes. ‘The illness is all in people’s heads AND it’s their parent’s fault’.

    ME: round in circles we go

    How the ME Association thought the appropriate response to this re-gaslighting of the people it’s supposed to represent was to grovel and say ‘thanks’ to Oxford NHS is anyone’s guess – because even the letter from the trust to it was deviously worded and obtuse.

    Oxford NHS said that:

    The Trust did not intend to imply that all people [with ME] experience severe mental health conditions such as psychosis, or that all individuals would present with challenging behaviour.

    In other words, people with ME aren’t ALL psychotic – just some of them are! They don’t ALL have challenging behaviour – just some of them do! Unless I’m missing something, this is the implication of Oxford NHS’s words: the words that the ME Association accepted as a sufficient apology.

    All of this is unsurprising, given – as I previously wrote – Oxford NHS is a hotbed of crank psychiatrists desperately applying their fraudulent, pseudo-scientific ideas to a physical illness.

    So, round in circles we go. After decades of abuse and neglect, an NHS trust repeatedly gaslights patients (while ignoring a wealth of actual science), and a charity (who said patients pay money to, to advocate for them) rolls over and takes it. Not good enough, in any way, shape, or form – given that just this week I reported on another ME patient dying while the NHS neglects her – but not surprising, either.

    Once again it’s marginalised, chronically ill disabled people who have to tolerate this shit – on top of tolerating an illness which leaves many of them more functionally impaired than even cancer or heart disease does. They should not accept this continued abuse from Oxford NHS – and nor should they accept the ME Association’s simpering response, either.

    Featured image via Alex E. Proimos – Wikimedia, resized to 770×403 under licence CC BY 2.0. the NHS – screengrab, and the ME Association – screengrab

    By Steve Topple

  • Sunak proves why the UN was right to snub the UK PM for its Climate Ambition Summit

    On 20 September, world leaders met in New York for the UN Climate Ambition Summit. In a novel move before the event, UN secretary general Antonio Guterres announced that leaders of nations failing to deliver on climate goals would not be invited to speak. And, of course, the UK didn’t make the cut. Instead, it joined the inauspicious group of climate laggards left off the speakers list, which included top emitters like the US and China.

    On the very same day, the Tories proved the UN’s snub completely correct by putting a whole host of the UK’s green policies through the shredder. Rishi Sunak declared that the UK government would roll back a series of climate policy targets. Specifically, Sunak said that the government would scale back the target on phasing out petrol and diesel cars, and weaken targets for an end to gas boiler installations.

    Chief executive of the government’s independent climate advisory group Chris Stark argued that the new timeline would make the government’s legal emissions goals “even harder to hit”. Back in June, the Climate Change Committee Stark heads raised concern about the government hitting its targets. They assessed that this was now even less certain than it had been the previous year.

    Failure of climate leadership

    The contrast between Sunak’s climate ‘leadership’ and that of the nation heads actually attending the summit couldn’t have been more stark. For example, Barbados PM Mia Mottley has spearheaded a fierce campaign to scale up climate finance. On top of this, she has set the ambitious target of 2030 for the phase out of fossil fuels for the Caribbean island nation.

    Former US vice-president and founder of The Climate Reality Project Al Gore also attended the UN’s summit. Notably, he voiced his disappointment at Sunak’s announcement:

    ‘Over-delivering’ a ‘woefully inadequate’ climate strategy

    You could almost laugh at the Tories’ woefully inadequate climate strategies, if the stakes weren’t so high. The summer of 2023 has seen one devastating wildfire after the next strike nations across the globe.

    In August, Hawaii experienced unprecedented wildfires that razed over 2,000 buildings and killed nearly a hundred people. Destructive blazes hit multiple other countries like Greece, Spain, and Canada. NASA meanwhile declared the summer of 2023 as the planet’s hottest on record.

    Moreover, as the Canary has pointed out, the Tory’s climate actions were neither ambitious nor in step with the necessary trajectory even before his most recent back-track. Likewise, in June, the government’s Climate Change Committee critiqued its policies and lack of concrete action. The independent climate advisory body stated that:

    the scale up of action overall is worryingly slow.

    In response, the Good Law Project, Friends of the Earth, and ClientEarth are taking the government to court for a second time over their “woefully inadequate” climate strategising.

    Net zero isn’t even zero

    What’s more, climate groups have also slammed the very concept of net zero itself. For instance, Glasgow Calls Out Polluters (GCOP) denounced net zero initiatives at the 2021 COP26 climate summit as “sciencewash”. As the Canary’s Tracy Keeling has previously explained:

    net zero doesn’t mean absolutely no carbon emissions. It’s essentially a plan to ensure the amount of carbon emitted by a country or organisation isn’t more than the amount of carbon they ensure is removed from the atmosphere.

    As a result, Keeling detailed how net zero can open the door to greenwashing:

    Net Zero calculations generally include unrealistic claims about nature’s carbon-storing capacity, uncertain technologies, and highly contested energy ‘solutions’. What they often lack, meanwhile, is a plan to dramatically lower emissions by reducing and ultimately ending fossil fuel use.

    The distant 2050 net zero pledge is leaving room for Sunak to kick the can down the road for a future government. Cleary, net zero was just another way for it to big-up its standing on climate world stage. Now, the PM’s sharp U-turn down the road to climate ruin has earned him a snub from heads of state who convened from across the globe to boast their climate policies.

    There’s no longer any hiding the fact that the UK is run in the interests of climate-deniers and delayers, and the capitalist class that benefits. Sunak has proven why the UN was right to shun him at its Climate Ambition Summit – he’s no climate leader.

    Feature image via United Nations/Youtube screengrab. 

    By Hannah Sharland

  • Sunak’s bonfire of climate policies is a boon for landlords and big oil, but a disaster everyone else

    On 20 September, Rishi Sunak announced that the government was torching a series of its climate policies. The millionaire prime minister demonstrated that his government is fully prepared to ditch the climate – and the millions of people vulnerable to its impacts – in favour of vested interests and Tory donors.

    The government plans to pivot on everything from the end date for the sale petrol and diesel cars to housing energy efficiency measures. In 2020, former prime minister Boris Johnson declared a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030. Fast-forward three years, and Sunak has now scrapped this target, pushing it back to 2035.

    Meanwhile, he also announced that the government is watering down the phase-out of gas boilers and off-grid oil boilers. Previously, the plan was to halt the installation of all gas boilers in 2035. Now, the government is aiming for just 80% by the same date.

    Unsurprisingly, Twitter was awash with searing criticism for the PM’s ill-thought-out move.

    Sunak’s climate policy hypocrisy

    On first glance, the prime minister’s announcement appeared to please very few people. Climate groups and campaigners, in particular, were understandably angry at the latest back-pedalling. Climate justice activist Mikaela Loach condemned the prime minister’s climate roll-back:

    Extinction Rebellion highlighted the government’s political donations from polluting corporations in the context of the new announcement:

    Politicians from rival parties also lambasted the move. Green Party MP Caroline Lucas laid out the prime minister’s climate hypocrisy:

    Labour’s shadow minister for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband, also joined in:

    Even some Conservatives were disappointed at the new pace for climate policies. Former environment minister Zac Goldsmith resigned from his position in June over the government’s “apathy” towards the climate crisis. He lamented the news that the government will water down its climate plan:

    On top of this, the declaration even saw Sunak burn bridges with big businesses, too. The move brought together an unlikely alliance of over 400 non-profits and corporations like Nestle, IKEA, and EON in a open letter against the changes. Vehicle manufacturer Ford also published a statement criticising the government its new petrol and diesel car policy:

    Cosying up to big oil and landlords

    However, on the other side of the coin, some folks on Twitter commented on the Prime Minister’s cosy relationship with fossil fuel majors:

    And that’s not to mention that Sunak’s family interests in fossil fuel firms. Sunak’s father-in-law’s firm, Infosys, signed deals with fossil fuel majors BP and Shell just this year:

    OpenDemocracy also entered the fray with a well-timed revelation. The site exposed how landlords had lobbied the government regarding energy efficiency targets which they said were “too ambitious” and would force them out of the rental market. Of course, property tycoons are also generous donors to the Conservative party.

    ‘Pragmatic’ move won’t save the planet, or the public purse

    Sunak branded the about-turn as “pragmatic”, “proportionate”, and “realistic”, and claimed the new policies would “ease the financial burden” on the British taxpayer. Like many classic Conservative appeals to ‘grown-up’ politics, the ploy quickly fell apart under scrutiny. Labour’s Ed Miliband pointed out that the government’s own climate advisors had shown that delaying the phase-out of petrol and diesel cars would not, in fact, save the public purse:

    Meanwhile, in 2022, an analysis by the Lib Dems suggested that upgrading homes with poor energy efficiency ratings could save households £9bn a year in energy bills. Moreover, the head of the International Energy Agency Fatih Birol has previously denounced the government’s “inexplicable” failure to prioritise energy efficiency measures.

    The non-profit Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) has already crunched the numbers and estimated that Sunak’s new net zero changes alone could cost households up to £8bn.

    ‘Heavy-handed’ policies?

    Moreover, some of Sunak’s announcements were simply so outrageous that people couldn’t resist dragging him on social media. Greenpeace brought the fire with a string of blisteringly on-point climate memes:

    Friends of the Earth also got in on the action:

    Others pointed out the sheer ludicrousy of Sunak’s pledges to scrap “heavy-handed” policies – which, in reality, don’t even exist:

    Ultimately, Sunak’s new climate policy timeline is a boon for the big polluter elite and the landlord class. It’s cold homes, soaring energy bills, and climate disasters for the rest. Why let climate catastrophe get in the way of good old profit-making business-as-usual ‘pragmatism’? It’s not as if it’s the end of the world – at least not for the planet-wreckers like Sunak and the climate criminal Tory donors rich enough to weather the storm. Any lingering pretense of the government’s climate credentials now visibly lies in tatters for the whole world to see.

    Feature image via Simon Dawson/ No 10 Downing Street/Wikimedia, cropped and resized to 1910 by 1000, licensed under CC BY 2.0

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A huge red dragon will be leading the march for Welsh independence on 23 September

    On Saturday 23 September, thousands of people are expected to march for Welsh independence. This follows on from a huge demonstration in October 2022, for which 10,000 people turned out in support of the growing cause.

    Welsh independence: support is growing

    As the Canary has documented, support for Welsh independence is growing. As we previously wrote, on 1 October 2022:

    10,000 people marched in central Cardiff calling for Welsh independence. Marches like the one on 1 October are becoming a more frequent occasion. An increase in support for an independent Wales went alongside the UK’s final exit from the European Union…

    In 2019, the year running up to 2020’s Brexit, people held at least three mass marches for Welsh independence. Over 5,000 people marched for independence through Merthyr Tydfil. In 2019, a majority of councillors in Gwynedd County Council in North Wales voted in support of independence. During the same year a YouGov survey of over a thousand people showed that 21% of respondents would support Welsh independence if there was a referendum.

    What’s more, polling by Redfield and Wilton Strategies on the question “”should Wales be an independent country?” found that:

    The results were 53% for No, 33% for Yes – up two percentage points from July – with 14% saying don’t know.

    With that in mind, campaign groups YesCymru and All Under One Banner (AUOB) Cymru have organised another March for Independence.

    A dragon leading the March for Independence

    People will descend on Bangor on 23 September to show their support for an independent Wales. Organisers say that people can arrive at Glanrafon Car Park from 11am, ready for the march itself to start at 1pm. After the march, at around 2pm, the groups will hold a rally at Glanrafon Car Park. YesCymru and AUOBCymru said in a press release that the rally:

    will feature a large stage and screen, speakers, and live music. Figures such as Rhun ap Iorwerth MS, Sera Cracroft, Joseph Gnagbo, Bryn Fôn, Fleur De Lys, and others will join the rallying cry for Welsh independence with Karen Wynne as MC.

    They added that:

    Following the rally, an afternoon of folk music will take place between 3pm and 5pm at Tafarn y Glôb in Upper Bangor. As the day transitions into evening, the “Indy Gig” will take place at Theatr Bryn Terfel, Pontio, featuring performances by Fleur De Lys, Tara Bandito, 3 Hwr Doeth, and Maes Parcio. Tickets for this event are available through the Pontio Website.

    On top of all this, there will be an ‘Indy Market’ from 10am to 4pm, which the groups say will showcase “a diverse array of organisations and local businesses”.

    People going to the march should bring flags, posters, and banners. However, the centrepiece of the event will be a “large roaring 10-metre-long Welsh Dragon”:

    A red Welsh dragon representing Welsh independence YesCymru

    It was created by the artist-led organisation Small World Theatre. The dragon will lead the march itself, guiding people through Bangor High Street, onto Glynne Road, and then down Deiniol Road before returning to Glanrafon Car Park.

    Creating a ‘better Wales’

    One of the event organisers, Geraint Thomas, said in a press release:

    The March in Bangor on Saturday presents an opportunity for supporters of Welsh independence to come together, united in our common goal of creating a better Wales. Due to the unprecedented numbers of people expected to attend the march, we have been asked by North Wales Police and Cyngor Gwynedd to ask that supporters use public transport where possible and to arrive in good time.

    Actor Sera Cracroft is one of the featured speakers. She said:

    The March for Independence in Bangor on Saturday promises to be an unforgettable event. The Dragon symbolises our fiery spirit and unwavering commitment to an independent Wales, and as we march through Bangor, we carry with us the hopes and dreams of a nation determined to forge its own path towards independence.

    With support clearly growing for an independent Wales, the march looks set to be an important moment for the independence movement. You can find out more information about it here.

    Featured image via YesCymru/AUOBCymru

    By Steve Topple

  • Doctors in England step up strike action over pay

    Consultants and junior doctors in England went on strike together for the first time on Wednesday 20 September.

    The doctors and government are deadlocked over the medics’ pay demands amid the biggest cost of living crisis in a generation.

    Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn tweeted:

    Meanwhile, one junior doctor shared from the picket line:

    ‘Under-staffed and under-resourced’

    The strikes are mainly over heavy workloads and below-inflation pay rises. They come after over a decade of Tory cuts to the NHS.

    A two-day strike by consultants started on Tuesday 19 September. Junior doctors then joined them for a three-day strike from Wednesday.

    Previous industrial action has seen consultants and junior doctors strike at different times, allowing them to cover for each other.

    Further joint strikes by consultants and junior doctors are planned for October.

    Consultants are pushing for an above-inflation pay award this year – inflation was running at around 11 percent in April. Meanwhile, junior doctors have asked for pay restoration at the rate of 35 percent.

    A press release sent out by the the British Medical Association (BMA) in August read:

    Against the backdrop of a hugely understaffed and under-resourced health service, junior doctors and consultants have seen their pay drop in real terms by over a third in the past 15 years. The Government continues to refuse to even enter talks with either group to try to bring an end to the disputes.

    Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which represents NHS organisations, said:

    Consultants and junior doctors walking out together is the awful scenario health leaders have long feared

    Taylor said the strike could result in 100,000 operations and appointments being cancelled, taking the total to “well over a million” since the start of the long-running series of walkouts.

    Previously, Dr Vishal Sharma, BMA consultants committee chair, had said:

    If the Government was in any doubt about doctors’ shared determination to reverse the crisis the NHS is in, to help keep the staff we have and address their pay erosion, today will surely dispel it. Never before have NHS consultants and junior doctors been forced to strike together for days on end, but that is where we have been brought by this Government…

    It is only by cooperating with doctors that the Government has a chance of addressing the recruitment and retention crisis the NHS workforce is suffering.

    ‘Rishi Sunak has nowhere to hide’

    Striking doctor Arjan Singh told AFP that the government was to blame for “refusing to negotiate with us in good faith”.

    He added:

    All we’re asking for is a doctor to be paid £20 ($31, 29 euros) an hour…, for someone who’s going to start life saving treatment for our loved ones.

    UK prime minister Rishi Sunak has told the doctors to call off their stoppages and warned the government will no longer negotiate on higher salaries. He has said the government had accepted recommendations from independent pay review bodies for salary increases of between 5.0 and 7.0 percent in the public sector.

    But co-chairs of BMA’s junior doctor committee Dr Vivek Trivedi and Dr Rob Laurenson have said:  

    the Prime Minister has the power to halt any further action by making us a credible offer that we can put to our members. Refusing to negotiate with us and with our consultant colleagues is not the way ahead.

    Rishi Sunak now has nowhere to hide… If he does not come to the table with a credible offer on pay, he will face another six months of strike action. And another six months after, and after that, if he continues to ignore us…

    Managing the strikes has already cost the Government in the region of £1 billion, and that figure – which is what it would cost to settle the junior doctors’ dispute – will continue to rise until the Government makes a credible offer to end the strike action… We have a mandate for six months more strike action, but they can make it much shorter – even a few days – if the Prime Minister was to simply come to the table.  

    The strikes are the sixth by junior doctors since March. Consultants have now walked out three times since July.

    They are just the latest group — from train drivers to lawyers — who have staged industrial action in the UK as inflation has soared, sending food, housing and other costs spiralling.

    Nurses and ambulance staff have also taken strike action, eventually accepting a five-percent pay rise in May.

    Featured image via BMA

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    By Afroze Fatima Zaidi

  • A cop being charged with Chris Kaba’s murder doesn’t change the racism of the British state

    The cop who shot Chris Kaba dead in south London on 5 September 2022 has been charged with murder. People are labelling the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) as “historic”. However, others are being cautious and reminding us that the Met Police are still institutionally racist.

    Chris Kaba: a cop up on a murder charge

    As the Canary previously reported:

    Police shot Chris in Streatham, south London, on Monday 5 September. He wasn’t carrying a firearm. BBC News reported the Independent Office for Police Conduct’s (IOPC) excuse for Kaba’s death as being that the car he was driving was linked to a previous firearms incident. Chris’s father, Prosper, said his son’s killing was “racist” and “criminal”.

    The IOPC carried out a homicide investigation into Chris’s killing. In March 2023, it passed its conclusions to the CPS. Now, as campaign group INQUEST wrote, the cop who fired the shot that killed Chris has been charged with murder:

    The officer will appear before Westminster Magistrates Court tomorrow (21 September). The officer is known only as NX121 at this stage.

    Chris’s family has been waiting over a year for this decision. During this time, the family, their supporters, and Black communities have had to repeatedly protest to ensure Chris’s case stays in the public eye:

    However, Canary writer Ife Thompson still rightly pointed out the length of time it took to charge the cop:

    The CPS charging this cop is “historic” as people noted. However, there’s little doubt that the odds of a conviction are stacked against the family.

    Institutional violence – yet no one is accountable

    INQUEST pointed out that since 1990, no cop has ever been successfully prosecuted for murder. Only one has been successfully prosecuted for manslaughter. The CPS has only ever brought ten other murder or manslaughter charges against cops – and none of these were successful. This is despite there being, as INQUEST noted, “1,871 deaths in or following police custody or contact in England and Wales”. That’s a conviction rate of 0.05%.

    So, as author Dr Muna Abdi noted, the CPS charging a cop should be viewed with caution – as it doesn’t mean they’ll be convicted:

    Moreover, campaigner Tashmia Owen pointed out what the predictable response from the press might be:

    Of course, the UK corporate media has form on this – as does the criminal justice system. Cops killed Mark Duggan in August 2011, and as the Canary previously reported:

    Despite police claiming he had a gun in a sock, the inquest into his death found he was unarmed at the time he was killed… he was smeared in the press as a gangster, this was aided by police officers, one of whom testified at his inquest that he was “among Europe’s most violent criminals”. However, no evidence was given to back up this claim, and Duggan only had two convictions for minor offences. Furthermore, an image of Duggan grieving at his daughter’s funeral was deliberately cropped to accompany gang related articles. Despite being unarmed, the inquest jury still ruled it was a lawful killing.

    Ultimately though, as Michael Morgan noted:

    Charging one cop with a Black man’s murder doesn’t address the Met Police’s institutional racism. Nor does the Met’s current campaign around its tattered reputation.

    The Met: broken beyond repair

    Currently, the force is conducting a purge of what the media has branded “rogue officers” – like Wayne Couzens, who kidnapped, raped, and murdered Sarah Everard. However, the idea that the Met’s problems are due to rogue officers or ‘bad apples’ is preposterous.

    Even by its own metrics, the Met has suspended 201 officers and put 860 more on restricted duties as it investigates them. That’s over 3 in every 100 officers who have done something so serious it warrants action against them. And that’s just the ones we know about.

    It’s institutional racism, misogyny, and homophobia which pervades the Met Police, not bad apples – and which ultimately comes from the state itself. The CPS is charging a cop with Chris’s murder against this backdrop.

    This changes nothing

    The CPS’s decision is a huge move forward for Chris’s family. It is also a significant moment for Black communities.

    But let’s be clear: this changes nothing. The Met, and ultimately the British state, are still racist, colonialist endeavours which subject Black people to violence in a society that has white supremacy as its lynchpin. Charging one cop won’t change this – and to think it will is just enabling the subjugation of marginalised communities to continue.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Inflation falling means nothing for poor people as energy prices increase 471% more than benefits have

    The latest inflation figures show the rate that prices are increasing has lowered to 6.7%. While economists, politicians, and richer people welcomed the news, in reality it means nothing for the poorest people in the UK. This is because, as new research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) revealed, people on benefits are still worse off than they were – with the price of energy having risen 471% more than their benefits have.

    Inflation: prices are still going up

    As BBC News reported, on Wednesday 20 September, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that:

    Slowing food prices helped drive a surprise fall in inflation in August, with the cost of living now at its lowest level in a year and a half.

    Inflation, which measures how prices change over time, fell to 6.7% in the year to August, down from 6.8% in July, official figures show.

    It is the third month in a row that the figure has dropped.

    Price rises for milk, cheese and eggs slowed the most, while fish and vegetable prices also eased.

    There was also a drop in hotel and air fare costs, although fuel prices jumped.

    When the rate of inflation falls, it does not mean prices are coming down, but that they are rising less quickly.

    That is, everything is STILL more expensive – just not as expensive as it might have been.

    Tory politicians like toxic home secretary Suella Braverman welcomed the news that we’re all still paying loads more to eat and heat:

    Economists also expressed their glee at this “good news”:

    And journalists pushed the ‘good news’ line too:

    However, back in the real world, all this means nothing if you’re reliant on benefits.

    Benefits claimants: hammered from all sides

    The JRF has crunched the numbers on how much prices have increased since April 2021 versus how much benefits have increased. It found that:

    • Overall Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation has increased by 19%.
    • Food and non-alcoholic drink prices have increased by 29%.
    • Energy has increased by 80%.

    However, the JRF said that during this time, benefits have only increased by 14%:

    A graph showing increases in inflation, food, energy, and benefits

    In other words, everything is massively more expensive now – and benefit claimants’ money doesn’t cover it. To put this into context:

    • Prices in general have risen 36% more than benefits have.
    • Food prices in particular have risen 107% more than benefits have [ED: 29-14 = 15 / 14 x 100 = 107%].
    • Energy prices have risen 471% more than benefits have [ED: 80-14 = 66 / 14 x 100 = 471%].

    ‘The damage has already been done’

    JRF’s chief economist Alfie Stirling said of the news:

    At 6.7% inflation remains high, but the real damage has already been done. For 7.3 million low-income households, the costs of essential goods and services have reached a level that is literally unaffordable. For those already skipping meals and going without hot water, the rate at which prices continue to rise is now secondary.

    Not that the government seems concerned. It is currently thinking about cutting benefits in real terms next April. As the Canary previously reported:

    the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is reportedly thinking about only increasing benefits next year in line with wage increases – not inflation.

    This would mean further disaster for countless families. For example, the JRF says that nine in ten low-income households on Universal Credit are already going without things like “food, hygiene products, or adequate clothing”.

    Stirling said of this:

    Government can and should be doing much more to protect living standards for those on the lowest incomes. This starts with following the existing rules and raising benefits at least in line with inflation.

    It’s highly unlikely the government will listen. So, while the news is gleefully welcomed by those for whom inflation is a figure on a chart – for the rest of us, it’s just another grim indicator of how unequal UK society is.

    Featured image via Alisdare Hickson – Flickr, resized to 1910×1000 under licence CC BY-SA 2.0

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Yet another woman is dying from severe ME while the NHS stands idly by

    A woman living with severe myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is being denied appropriate care by an NHS trust. Her and her family fear for her life. This is because her condition is rapidly deteriorating, while a hospital fails to fully support her. However, her story is not the first case where the NHS is catastrophically failing women living with severe ME – and sadly, it’s unlikely to be the last.

    Severe ME: an awful disease

    Karen Gordon has lived with severe ME for nearly 20 years. It is a chronic systemic neuroimmune disease not dissimilar to Long Covid. You can read more about ME and its symptoms here. Around 25% of people living with the disease are classed as ‘severe’ or ‘very severe’. These people are generally, if not permanently, bedbound; they’re often unable to eat solid food, and sometimes barely able to communicate.

    This is what Karen’s life is like. As a petition her family set up for her notes:

    Karen is totally bed bound and cannot eat or drink.

    The ME causes many symptoms including generalised pain, abdominal pain, headache, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, and hypersensitivity to sensory stimuli including, light and noise. She has to keep her eyes covered…

    Karen has had ME since she was 10 years old. She has been tube fed for 19 years mostly at home. In the last two years her ME health has become worse, causing more severe nausea and vomiting and severe abdominal pain leading to more feeding and nutritional difficulties.

    Medical professionals generally think there is no known cure for ME. Around 6% of patients have recovered from the disease – but otherwise, doctors often leave people without adequate support or care – actively making people’s condition worse. This is what Karen is currently experiencing.

    Karen’s situation

    Currently, Karen is at home. However, in recent years she has been hospitalised because of being unable to eat or drink. She needed intravenous (IV) total parenteral nutrition (TPN). This is where doctors give patients fluids and nutrition via an IV line, directly into a large vein near their heart. However, Karen’s experience of being in the Conquest Hospital, St Leonard’s-on-Sea, has been appalling.

    At first, doctors gave her a side room to herself. This was because National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines, as well as Karen’s consultants, recommended it. However, the Conquest Hospital has now withdrawn the room.

    Being in hospital is a distressing and debilitating experience for Karen. As her family state:

    Being in a 6-bedded bay is very unsuitable for Karen and causes an increase in symptoms, unnecessary suffering, deterioration of the ME and It can cause a relapse of the ME and it is life-threatening. The sensory stimuli and busyness around her in a bay are overwhelming and exhausting for Karen and cause her more severe pain. Rest and sleep are particularly important for people with ME and they are needed for energy management… In a bay, Karen gets hardly any sleep or rest due to the disturbance.

    So the NHS, Karen, and her family agreed that she should have IV TPN at home. However, the Conquest Hospital said it cannot provide this. It told Karen she would have to go to St Mark’s hospital in London, 100 miles away, and stay there for 6-8 weeks. Doctors would have to assess her before they could start home IV TPN.

    However, this was completely unsuitable for Karen – and littered with problems:

    • The journey would be detrimental to her health.
    • St Mark’s would not give her a side room.
    • The hospital wouldn’t let Karen’s mother, who is her full-time carer, stay with her 24/7.

    So, Karen refused the referral – and as a result, the Conquest Hospital discharged her. It said there was “no alterative” it could “offer”.

    Dying at home with no support

    Karen is now at home with no access to IV fluids. In short, her and her family believe she is dying. On 14 September, her family noted that:

    Two tests in the last month have shown that Karen is dehydrated. But she has not even been given a few days of I/V fluid at home to help her during this time by the Urgent Community Response / Virtual Ward teams.

    They believe she is:

    suffering from life threatening dehydration and malnutrition. She has lost a lot of weight. She is getting thinner and thinner. Karen is scared that she is going to die from dehydration and malnutrition. Karen does not want to die.

    Karen needs the East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust to provide I/V feeding (TPN) and I/V fluid at home without delay.

    A spokesperson for East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust, which runs the Conquest Hospital, told the Canary:

    Patients with ME have a range of needs that often require complex multidisciplinary care. All treatment that we provide to patients who have ME is as closely in line with NICE guidance as possible, and ensuring that they have the best clinical care and experience the best possible clinical outcomes remains our highest priority. We continue to work to provide care that will deliver the best outcome for our patient.

    While the trust obviously cannot comment on people’s private medical details, this is still a non-response. It provides no explanation as to why the Conquest Hospital won’t provide IV TPN at home – when countless NHS trusts do this as standard. Moreover, during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, IV TPN was maintained across the entire NHS. Plus, East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust’s own guidance states that IV TPN can be done at home, noting that:

    Once your line is in place and its position is confirmed your treatment can commence right away. If you are going home, you will be given an information booklet to keep which has information for you and the Health Care Professionals that will be delivering your treatment and changing your dressings whilst in the community.

    Karen’s situation is desperate. However, she is not the first person living with ME to experience this.

    The NHS is systemically failing ME patients

    The Canary has documented the NHS’s dire treatment of several women living with ME.

    Sami Berry is one such patient. In February 2023, she could not eat, and her body was struggling to get nutrition even through a feeding tube. However, the NHS hospital responsible for her care was refusing to give Sami the right medication to help with this. Her consultant even said he wouldn’t necessarily listen to the advice of ME specialists.

    Eventually, the NHS did start to treat Sami properly – however even to this day, she is still struggling to get adequate care. For example, her GP surgery recently kicked her off its books after she told them she was going to make a formal complaint about its care.

    Alice Barrett is another such patient. The NHS hospital she was at was forcing her to be tube-fed at an angle of 30°. However, Alice’s family said she could not tolerate this due to her illnesses. Eventually, the hospital agreed to change this – reducing the angle she was fed at.

    However, the improvement in Alice’s care only came after a campaign caused media attention about her story.

    Sami and Alice are just two examples of countless people with ME who the NHS is failing. In the past year, at least two people have died. As the Canary previously wrote:

    Anna Fitzgerald-Clark died on Christmas Day 2022. She lived with severe ME, but little information exists online about her. She does have a page where people can donate to charity Action for ME – here.

    Then, just after New Year’s 2023, Kara Jane Spencer also died. She was a talented singer-songwriter, who recorded an album to raise money for ME research.

    All this is despite NICE updating its treatment guidelines in 2021 – but that only happened after a concerted campaign by patients, advocates, and charities.

    When will change actually happen?

    Karen’s situation is just one example of how the NHS often treats people living with ME. For decades – thanks to medical professionals and researchers’ psychologisation of the disease – health services have neglected, mistreated, and gaslighted patients.

    NICE updated its guidelines in 2021 to remove harmful and ineffective treatments – those pushed by the same professionals who psychologise the illness. Many people hoped this would be a watershed moment for the community. They hoped patients would start to get the recognition, validation, and support they desperately needed. Sadly, and somewhat predictably, this hasn’t been the case.

    The government is currently running a consultation on how public services treat people with ME, their families, and carers. But given its current campaign against chronically ill and disabled people who are reliant on social security, it’s unlikely that anything coming from the government will bring about meaningful change for people living with ME, either.

    Change will only come about for the ME community from the bottom up. It won’t come in the form of guidelines for medical professionals. Nor will it look like a government consultation. It is unlikely to come directly from charities, either. Change will come from people living with ME, their advocates, and campaigners forcing the government, institutions, and medical professionals to take notice and fix up.

    However, this is not quick enough for Karen, who needs support now. So, you can sign her petition here – and you can also send a message online to East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust here.

    Featured image via Karen Gordon’s family – change.org 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Teachers begin action short of a strike, as NASUWT digs in while the government makes moves

    Members of NASUWT, the teachers’ union, have started action short of a strike across schools and sixth form colleges in England. The union said that teachers face an “excessive workload” and “unreasonable expectations”. Of course, at the root of the problem is the Tory government – which has continued to decimate the education system in the country.

    NASUWT: ‘Time for a Limit”

    The union said on its website that:

    Our members have told us it’s Time for a Limit on excessive workload, unreasonable expectations and the increasing number of hours it takes to fulfil their role.

    Despite their best efforts to keep up with an ever-increasing workload, 69% of teachers told us they feel too worn down to give their job their best effort.

    Our Big Question and Wellbeing Surveys carried out in 2022 found that teachers ranked workload as the top issue that most impacted both their physical and mental health.

    This is on top of issues surrounding pay. Back in July, NASUWT members accepted the government’s 6.5% pay increase offer. However, what they didn’t accept was its plans to improve working conditions. So, the union said then that its ballot of members – which returned a ‘yes’ to strike action – would remain in place. NASUWT general secretary Patrick Roach said at the time that to tackle excessive workloads, members would take measures “up to and including industrial action”.

    On Monday 18 September, NASUWT started that action. Its members started effectively working to rule:

    This action short of a strike means that teachers in schools will refuse to be directed to:

    • Work weekends or bank holidays.
    • Run extracurricular activities.
    • Work after school “session times”.
    • Perform admin work.

    In sixth form colleges, teachers are undertaking similar – albeit reduced – actions.

    Tories fiddling while teachers burn out

    NASUWT maintains that government and bosses’ expectations of teachers are too high – and its research backs this up. In its 2022 survey, the union found that:

    • 81% of teachers said their job had adversely impacted their mental health.
    • 83% of teachers said they experienced more work-related stress.
    • 85% of teachers feel too tired after work to enjoy the things they would like to do.
    • 74% of teachers said that their partner, family or friends often get frustrated with the pressure of their job.
    • 61% of teachers said they feel disempowered by unreasonable or unrealistic expectations.

    Moreover, government recruitment of teachers is a mess – with it repeatedly missing its own targets:

    As if by magic, on the same day as NASUWT members started working to rule, the government announced action on teacher workloads. The Department for Education (DfE) said:

    Work is underway to support teachers and leaders to tackle unnecessary workload, as the government establishes a new taskforce of unions, teachers, and sector leaders. The taskforce will help support the government’s wider ambition to reduce working hours for teachers and leaders by five hours per week within three years.

    As the Evening Standard reported, the Association of School and College Leaders is on the taskforce. Its general secretary – Geoff Barton – welcomed the plan, but noted:

    we remain sceptical about whether there is the will in government to take some of the steps that are required to produce systemic change.

    The Evening Standard said that the “four main teaching unions” were sitting on the taskforce. However, it’s unclear at this time whether or not NASUWT is part of this.

    ‘No longer acceptable’

    Roach said that:

    We can no longer allow teachers to be overworked and exhausted by the demands of the job…

    The Government has accepted that excessive workload is a problem that must be tackled. But, the reality is that teachers in England are working some of the longest hours anywhere in the OECD and this is simply no longer acceptable or sustainable…

    The industrial action… will mean that for the first time in a decade specific measures and protections are being put into place to tackle excessive workload and working hours and to ensure teachers’ health, safety and welfare.

    How long the action short of strike will go on for is unclear. However, what is clear is that teachers have had enough – and the Tory government is clearly aware of this. Whether or not it does anything meaningful to address the dire state the education sector and profession is in is another matter entirely.

    Featured image via NASUWT

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.