Category: UK

  • London,

    Storm Eunice hits Europe on Friday, while Britain affected with record-breaking winds and forcing millions to take shelter. At least 7 peoples killed in Britain. Storm disrupted flights, trains and ferries across Western Europe.

    London was empty after the British capital was placed under its first “red” weather warning, meaning there is “danger to life”. According to police, by nightfall, a woman in her 30s had died after a tree fell on a car.

    Meanwhile a man in his 50s was also killed in northwest England after debris struck the windscreen of a vehicle while travelling, according to Merseyside Police.

    Falling trees during storm killed three people in the Netherlands and a man in his 60s in southeast Ireland, while a Canadian man aged 79 died in Belgium, according to officials in each country.

    In London, the highest weather alert level was declared across southern England, South Wales and the Netherlands, with many schools closed and rail travel halted, as high tides waves broke sea walls along the coasts.

    Meanwhile, power outages and blackout to more than 140,000 homes in England, mostly in the southwest, and 80,000 properties in Ireland according to utility companies.

    Three people were taken to hospital after suffering injuries in the storm, and a large section of the roof on the capital’s Millennium Dome was shredded by the gales.

    Wind gusted of 122 miles (196 kilometers) per hour was measured on the Isle of Wight off southern England, “provisionally the highest gust ever recorded in England”, the Met Office said.

    Scientists said the Atlantic storm’s tail could pack a “sting jet”, a rarely seen meteorological phenomenon that brought havoc to Britain and northern France in the “Great Storm” of 1987.

    Eunice caused high waves to batter the Brittany coast in northwest France, while Belgium, Denmark and Sweden all issued weather warnings. Long-distance and regional trains were halted in northern Germany.

    Ferries across the Channel, the world’s busiest shipping lane, were suspended, before the English port of Dover reopened in the late afternoon.

    Prime Minister Boris Johnson, has ordered the British army on standby and tweeted,

    “We should all follow the advice and take precautions to keep safe.”

    Environment Agency official Roy Stokes warned weather watchers and amateur photographers against heading to Britain’s southern coastline in search of dramatic footage, calling it “probably the most stupid thing you can do”.

    London’s rush-hour streets, where activity has been slowly returning to pre-pandemic levels, were virtually deserted as many heeded government advice to stay home.

    Trains into the capital were already running limited services during the morning commute, with speed limits in place, before seven rail operators in England suspended all operations.

    This post was originally published on VOSA.

  • Private sector ships could be leased to stem the flow of migrants across the English Channel. At least, according to defence minister James Heappey. In a flustered interview on LBC, Heappey said the extra ships would be used in the channel to stop refugee boats.

    But there is a problem with this plan. Just weeks ago an ex-navy commander warned against virtually every aspect of it. And called for a move away from the rhetoric of ‘pushback’.

    Here’s Heappey stumbling his way through some moderately challenging questions from LBC presenter Tom Swarbrick:

    Stopping the flow

    Heappey seemed to be saying up to ten ships, and an unknown number of smaller vessels, would be leased by the military. He seemed to think these would be manned by military personnel. Measures in home secretary Priti Patel’s new Borders bill (here’s our take on this racist legislation) could then be used to arrest refugees “in the channel.”

    But Heappey’s comment were confused. And they contravened the advice of a former navy commander called before the defence select committee just weeks ago. However when pressed on who would be arresting refugees. Heappey admitted the Navy’s sailors and marines had no legal power to do so.

    Heappey also said that navy platforms were too big to ‘cross-deck’ people from dinghies to ships. And that:

    …we are looking that we would need anywhere up to another ten of the larger vessels that you would use to do the mid-channel cross-decking, and I’m guessing that we would need a number of smaller vessels to shadow dinghies to the shore.

    The plan was yet to be modelled, Heappey added, before suggesting 10 ships would be the upper end figure.

    Select committee

    But let’s look at what Heappey has said in comparison to recent testimony at the defence select committee on this exact issue or ‘Operation Isotrope’ as the military calls it’s involvement in the anti-refugee effort.

    The English channel is a busy global shipping lane, retired commander Tom Sharp warned the committee on 26 January. And he said that using boats to stop dinghies carried its own risk to life:

    In my view, we need to move our mindset very slightly away from this idea of large boats or small boats coming alongside overladen rubber dinghies. You are creating a safety of life issue right there, even though you are trying to help.

    Tremendous risk

    As currently envisaged, the operation carries serious risks to people’s lives, Sharp said:

    There is a tremendous amount of risk just associated with what is being discussed, which is why I do not think it is the right solution.

    Committee member Mark Francois asked about Rules of Engagement (ROE). This term usually describes the conditions under which the military can use violent force. Sharp did not approve:

    I am not even sure “rules of engagement” is the right term. This is a bit like confusing the inherent right of self-defence with rules of engagement.

    Immutable laws of the sea

    He also explained that it was “immutable” maritime law that mariners helped other mariners if they were in distress:

    SOLAS and UNCLOS 98 are immutable requirements that are nothing to do with rules of engagement. The rules of engagement will be set from the centre. They are then defined by lawyers.

    Francois then asked about “pushback” – the notion that small boats at sea could be turned around and sent back. Sharp rejected this terminology, and the ideas behind it:

    I would be happy if the expression “pushback” were never used again. I cannot conceive of a situation where you are physically turning these ships back that is either legal or, perhaps more importantly, safe

    Rhetoric vs reality

    Clearly the Tories love to sound hawkish on this issue. Refugees are one of their favourite punchbags to distract from internal crisis and appeal to their base. Former senior military officers would be the last place one would expect a nuanced view from. Yet the kind of views and plans put forward by people like Francois and Heappey have run aground on reality.

    The evidence is that there aren’t enough actual navy ships for the job; that the whole belligerent framing of the debate around ‘pushback’ and ‘rules of engagement’ is wrong; and that putting even more ships into an incredibly busy shipping lane is, according to people who actually know, a really bad idea.

    That’s before even getting into the heartlessness it takes to turn refugees away.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/PO Lee Blease, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under Open Government Licence.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A survey is looking at how the media depicts a debilitating chronic illness. It is asking people living with the disease known as myalgic encephalomyelitis – commonly referred to as ME – their carers, and advocates to give feedback on imagery the media uses when reporting on it. But if you wish to take part, you don’t have long – the survey closes on Sunday 20 February.

    Peter White and Simon McGrath both live with ME and are the authors of the survey. The pair have organised the survey as part of the coalition group Forward-ME which represents a number of UK charities and campaign groups.

    ME: a debilitating disease

    ME, is a chronic systemic neuroimmune disease. The latest research says it affects at least 65 million people worldwide and around 250,000 people in the UK. But these numbers could be underestimates. Some research puts the number of undiagnosed ME cases at 80%. Meanwhile, other studies show a prevalence rate in the population between 0.2% and 3.48%.

    While symptoms vary for every person, people living with ME often experience:

    • A worsening of symptoms brought on by physical activities, mental activities, or both. This is called post-exertional malaise (PEM).
    • Flu-like symptoms.
    • All-over pain.
    • Sleep disturbance / problems.
    • Cognitive impairments.
    • Impairments of the body’s autonomic systems, such as nervous, digestive, and endocrine.
    • Hyper-sensitivity.
    A shared experience of ME

    White’s experience of the disease may sound familiar to a lot of people. He told The Canary:

    After a “probable virus” my GP advised me to rest it out. After three months I felt more or less recovered and active. But three months after that the weird fatigue set in. It was unlike anything I had felt before, and it gradually got worse. It was disabling, and has stopped me from being able to work full time since then. However I am also fortunate that my symptoms are far milder than others.

    So, White has a personal investment in his work.

    “Not representative”?

    White and McGrath have also set up a dedicated Twitter account for this called A Picture of ME. You can follow it here.

    White told The Canary:

    As we are trying to increase media coverage of ME, we have had some success. But we have seen many comments within the ME community on social media saying that images are not representative of their lived experiences. We know images are important. It is cliché to say that a picture paints a thousand words. But there is also a lot of truth in that.

    We have to ensure that the issue is more than just anecdotal. We have to ensure that it is a widely held view, before trying to do something to improve the situation.

    So before we think about how to resolve the issue, we have to see if there is an issue. And that is why we are holding this survey.

    Qualitative questions

    The survey states that it:

    aims to understand if photos attached to news stories about ME […] are good or bad representations of the disease.

    We will use the results to help the media improve representation of people with ME.

    It is qualitative with open questions. This means that White and McGrath’s own views are not influencing the results. They will use the results to, as the survey states, “improve comms for Forward-ME”. You can complete the survey here.

    So, how does the corporate media depict the disease in its imagery?

    Corporate imagery

    The survey gives examples, like the ones below:

    A picture of a woman looking tired

    A picture of a woman holding her head

    Some people have already made their feelings clear on Twitter. For example, as Aineemac said:

    I swear they must look for stock images of stress, tiredness or headache. If someone took a photo of me last week on ambulance stretcher, with entinox & dark prescription glasses just to get tests done – it’d show reality. Or lying in my hospital bed in darkned room with 2 carers

    White hopes that the survey will get a rounded picture of people’s views. He told The Canary:

    We hope that this will either tell us that “all is OK” at which point we will move on to other things, or maybe that there is some disconnect, at which point we will see where we might make improvements.

    A much needed insight

    ME has been fraught with controversy and medical neglect. Some conduct by parts of the medical establishment relating to ME could be seen as corrupt and subversive. Medical professionals, at times backed-up by the media, have disbelieved and stigmatised people living with ME, given them incorrect treatment or told them it’s ‘all in their heads’. So, as White summed up to The Canary:

    I believe that ME suffers from the same blocks as other civil rights battles: stigma, lack of belief, invisibility. It has so much in common with the civil rights movements and social justice fights. It is not, sadly, just about health.

    The survey about media imagery forms part of this. The world needs to see the reality of ME. Otherwise, it will be a struggle to improve conditions for people living with it.

    Featured image via A Picture of ME

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • On 17 February, Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner announced the party’s “hardline” approach to law and order. In a shocking statement, the deputy leader urged terror police to “shoot first” and “ask questions second”. People soon took to Twitter to express outrage at Rayner’s disgraceful comments.

    Shoot first

    Appearing on Matt Forde’s Political Party podcast, Rayner said:

    On things like law and order I am quite hardline. I am like, shoot your terrorists and ask questions second.

    Explaining her “hardline” approach to law and order, Rayner added:

    I want you to beat down the door of the criminals and sort them out and antagonise them. That’s what I say to my local police … three o’clock in the morning and antagonise them.

    Black Lives Matter?

    The Black Lives Matter movement saw a resurgence in 2020 following the police killing of George Floyd in the US. Anti-racist campaigners in the UK highlighted the police’s disproportionate criminalisation and use of force against Black people in this country, particularly those with special educational needs and disabilities or experiencing mental health crises.

    A central demand of the anti-racist movement remains a move away from punitive and draconian reactions to criminal justice issues, towards healing and community-centred solutions.

    Rayner was among the countless neoliberals to perform solidarity with the anti-racist movement at its peak. In 2020, she expressed solidarity by taking the knee in a bizarre photo opportunity with Labour leader Kier Starmer.

    Pointing out Rayner’s bare-faced hypocrisy on the matter, independent media outlet Another Angry Voice shared:

     

    And The Canary‘s former editor-at-large Kerry-Anne Mendoza said:

    Indeed, Rayner’s latest remarks echo Tony Blair’s ‘tough on crime’ approach to criminal justice issues. Blair’s punitive anti-crime policies and legislation created a boom in England and Wales’ prison population, and criminalised many people suffering from addiction and experiencing mental health issues.

    Further, evidence demonstrates that such approaches fail to reduce crime.

    The policy already exists

    Others took to Twitter to highlight the fact that the UK’s terror police already enacts Rayner’s suggested ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ policy. Former chief prosecutor Nazir Afzal shared: Former chief prosecutor for North West England Nazir Afzal shared:

    This is exemplified by the tragic case of Jean Charles de Menezes. In 2005, armed police mistook the Brazilian electrician for a suicide bomber, shooting him seven times at close range and killing him in Stockwell station.

    Raising this point, Novara‘s co-founder James Butler tweeted:

    Sam Browse shared:

    And there was this reminder on the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday in Derry:

    Another bad day for Labour

    Research consultant and Hackney-based activist Heather Mendick set out the only logical response to Rayner’s heinous remarks:

    All in all, this represents a new low for Starmer’s increasingly right-wing Labour Party.

    Featured image via Sky News/YouTube

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A freedom of information (FoI) request on the Metropolitan Police’s use of strip-searches has revealed that Black people remain over represented in the force’s use of the humiliating and degrading practice. A concerning number of children are also represented in the data.

    And despite calls to reduce the number of strip-searches conducted by the Met, Nottingham criminology researcher Dr Tom Kemp found an increasing trend of the force’s use of the draconian measure.

    Disproportionate use of strip-searches

    An FoI request by Kemp found that Met police carried out a staggering 172,093 strip searches in the past 5 years.

    In spite of calls to reduce the force’s use of the humiliating and traumatic practice, Kemp noted a peak of around 34,000 strip-searches in 2020 which “continued a trend in increasing use of strip searches from before the pandemic”.

    Kemp’s analysis of the data revealed that 33.5% of strip-searches carried out by the Met police in the last five years were on Black people. This amounts to 57,733 strip-searches. However, Black people only make up around 11% of London’s population.

    Conversely, white British people – who make up nearly 45% of London’s population –  accounted for 27% of strip-search victims.

    A concerning number of children were reflected in the number of strip-searches the Met has enacted. Indeed, the force carried out over 9,000 strip-searches on children in the last five years, including more than 2,000 under-16s.

    In an open letter published in the Guardian in 2015, a group of children’s rights organisation leaders raised concerns abut safeguarding and child protection when it comes to strip-searches. The letter read:

    Strip-searching is a humiliating, degrading and frightening experience for anyone, but especially for children who come into contact with the police, a high proportion of whom may have experienced abuse and/or mental health difficulties.

    Traumatic experiences

    In 2019, the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) drew critical attention to the Met’s excessive number of “unwarranted” strip-searches. The inspectorate raised concerns about the disproportionate number of strip-searches carried out on people from racialised Black and ethnic minority backgrounds. It also noted the high number of children represented in the Met’s strip-search figures, highlighting that some cases were not “properly justified”.

    The data gleaned from Kemp’s FoI request comes just weeks after the Met was forced to apologise to Koshka Duff after carrying out a degrading and misogynistic strip-search in 2013 which left her with PTSD.

    Recounting her personal experience of strip-searches and reflecting on the mental and physical harm caused by the police’s draconian practice, The Canary‘s Emily Apple said:

    It has to stop. This isn’t about police safety. This isn’t about ‘concern’ for detainees’ well being. The police do it when they don’t like someone. They do it to subjugate, humiliate and repress people.

    As was the case for Apple, the victims of traumatic, unjustified strip-searches are routinely denied access to justice or recourse.

    The Met police’s increasing and disproportionate use of strip-searches is incredibly disturbing. Officers can’t be trusted to respect people’s rights as things stand. We can only speculate as to what the future holds if they have even more powers and less accountability.

    Featured image via Ehimetalor Akhere Unuabona/Unsplash 

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Tories love nothing more than pushing their version of the truth. Their latest effort to make sure their own version gets told is the new guidance on teaching political issues in schools. A 23-page document announced by education secretary Nadhim Zahawi was published on 17 February to considerable debate.

    Black Lives Matter (BLM), Israel/Palestine and the British Empire are among the issues highlighted in the document. So it’s worth analysing what the Tories are up to with this new move. An accompanying blog on the guidance on the government’s education hub site states:

    Everyone has their own views on particular subjects and issues and teachers are no different, but it is important that teachers explain things to their students in a way that is impartial. Teaching about political issues and the differing views on these is an essential part of the curriculum, helping pupils to form their own opinions and prepare them for later life.

    Absolutely no need

    That same blog also acknowledges that:

    The law states that teachers must not promote partisan political views and should offer a balanced overview of opposing views when political issues are taught.

    And here is part of the problem. Laws already exist to ensure educators are fair and balanced. Teachers and senior trade union officials immediately questioned why, if this is already the case, we need more guidance. For example, National Education Union joint secretary Mary Bousted told the press:

    There is absolutely no need for new guidance on how to appropriately handle political and social subjects… Very good guidance already exists and this is followed up and down the country.

    Singled out

    So is this just about Tories singling out certain issues they want to either exclude or push? Well, that case could certainly be made. Black Lives Matter (BLM) seems to be one of the topics the Tories are worried about. For example, it says anti-racist movements like BLM should be treated with caution:

    Where schools wish to teach about specific campaigning organisations, such as some of those associated with the Black Lives Matter movement, they should be aware that this may cover partisan political views. These are views which go beyond the basic shared principle that racism is unacceptable, which is a view schools should reinforce.

    And alternatives to oppressive, racialised policing seem to be beyond the pale:

    Examples of such partisan political views include advocating specific views on how government resources should be used to address social issues, including withdrawing funding from the police.

    Israel/Palestine

    Perhaps unsurprisingly, their guidance says material on the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands should be carefully navigated, even treated with a sort of ‘both sides’ attitude. As if Israel/Palestine is a simple conflict of interests between two equal groups, rather than the oppression of one by the other. One scenario talks about using information from an outside organisation which may be partisan:

    For instance, the apparently factual content includes partisan political views on both historical events in the region, presented without additional context that would make clear that these are contested views. Several quotes from political figures have been inappropriately abridged to present an inaccurate version of what was really said, and important contextual information about these quotes has been omitted.

    This simply seems to mean that teachers and schools should check the information they are using. Which, again, already seems to be a legal obligation. Though it could also be argued that requiring massive amounts of Tory-approved context places the burden on individual teachers, already hard-pressed in their jobs and short of time.

    Empire and socialism

    The British empire and imperialism also make an appearance. While the document says the reformation and renaissance are unlikely to be an issue:

    For more recent historical events including those which are particularly contentious and disputed, political issues may be presented to pupils. This includes many topics relating to empire and imperialism, on which there are differing partisan political views, and which should be taught in a balanced manner.

    The framing hundreds of years of exploitation and occupation simply as a ‘partisan’ issue, surely downplays the continuing impacts of imperialism around the world.

    Already law

    Two days ahead of publication, NEU officials were questioning the new guidance. Joint secretary Mary Bousted challenged education minister Nadhim Zahawi directly on Twitter, accusing him of engaging in culture wars:

    The Tory choice of topics is telling. Why Israel/Palestine, BLM and empire? Of all issues, why are these being treated as if two equally legitimate sides deserve to be heard. Also significant, is the government decision to reinforce with guidance what already appears to be law. We need to question why they are doing this.

    The NEU seems to think this is not about enforcement existing rules. And non-impartial teaching doesn’t seem to be a major issue in our schools. So maybe it is the Tories, not teachers, who need a bit of self-reflection. Biased education isn’t the issue here. Biased culture war-style policies, however, do seem to be a recurring problem.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Marine Lan-Nguyen, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced via CC BY 25.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Three police officers who worked with Sarah Everard’s killer Wayne Couzens have been charged over allegations they shared racist and misogynistic messages with him. Two serving Metropolitan police officers and one former officer have been charged with sending grossly offensive messages on WhatsApp, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.

    The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) sent prosecutors a file on allegations the three shared racist and misogynistic messages with Couzens between April and August 2019. The three are due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on March 16. The CPS said it cannot confirm the names of the officers for operational reasons.

    “Grossly offensive messages”

    Rosemary Ainslie, head of the CPS Special Crime Division, said:

    Following a referral of evidence by the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the CPS has authorised charges against two serving Metropolitan Police officers and one former officer.

    All three will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 16 March for their first hearing.

    Each of the three defendants has been charged with sending grossly offensive messages on a public communications network. The alleged offences took place on a WhatsApp group chat.

    The function of the CPS is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges to a court to consider.

    Criminal proceedings are active and nothing should be published that could jeopardise the defendants right to a fair trial.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Thousands of homes are without power after Storm Dudley swept through parts of the UK. Capel Curig in Wales experienced gusts of up to 81mph, with Emley Moore in West Yorkshire and Drumalbin in South Lanarkshire seeing 74mph winds.

    Northern Powergrid said 1,000 properties still had no lights on Thursday morning due to the weather.

    WEATHER Storms
    (PA Graphics)

    Trying to get the lights back on

    Northern Powergrid’s spokesperson said:

    Our teams have restored power to some 19,000 homes and businesses impacted by Storm Dudley, and we are working to get the lights back on for around 1,000 properties still affected,

    On Wednesday evening at 9pm, around 4,000 people were thought to still be without power. About 14,000 customers were originally affected by the weather but 10,000 had been reconnected. National Rail said as of 7am Thursday, dozens of train companies have been affected in the north of England, the Midlands, Wales and across most of Scotland, including LNER, Transport for Wales and ScotRail.

    It added that due to damage to the overhead electric wires between Bedford and St Albans, some lines are currently blocked on the East Midlands Railway and Thameslink lines.

    Weather warnings for Storm Eunice

    The Met Office has issued yellow weather warnings until 10am on Thursday for Scotland, with wintry showers overnight leading to a risk of ice. It comes ahead of Storm Eunice, which is predicted to bring in winds in excess of 95mph in coastal areas while inland areas could still see gusts to around 80mph, the weather service added.

    (PA Graphics)
    (PA Graphics)

    It has warned there is a potential for fallen trees, damage to buildings and travel disruption as a result of the storm.

    Regional wind warnings

    National Highways, with The Met Office, have issued a severe weather alert for strong winds covering the East of England, East Midlands, West Midlands, South East and South West, between the hours of 6am and 6pm on Friday.

    The agency added “there is a particularly high risk that high-sided vehicles and other ‘vulnerable’ vehicles such as caravans and motorbikes could be blown over” in areas including the East of England, Midlands, South East and South West. The Environment Agency had two flood warnings in place as of Thursday morning in northern areas of England.

    Flood duty manager Katharine Smith said: “Strong winds could bring coastal flooding to parts of the west, south-west and south coast of England, as well as the tidal River Severn, through the early hours of Friday morning and into the early afternoon.

    This is due to Storm Eunice resulting in high waves and potential storm surge coinciding with the start of a period of spring tides.

    She said agency teams were making preparations, erecting barriers and clearing screens where flood debris can build up. Green Flag has predicted a spike in breakdowns across the country over the coming days.

    Mark Newberry, commercial director at Green Flag, said:

    As a result of these weather conditions, we urge drivers to remain cautious and to carry out the relevant safety checks before setting off on their journeys.

    It’s particularly important that people are as prepared as possible to withstand the high expected wind speeds and potential snow in some areas.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A policy advisor at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has a history of far-right associations, The Canary can reveal. The DCMS is led by Nadine Dorries.

    Francesca Howard previously worked for UKIP, and currently works for the government in cyber security. And there is a trail of association with extreme far-right figures, including to a Swedish party of Nazi origins, which raises serious concerns.

    Who is Howard?

    Members of the House of Commons are required to list secretaries and assistants in a register. Howard’s name appears in a register from December 2021. Her LinkedIn page also confirms that she worked as a research assistant, sponsored by Conservative MP for Nuneaton Marcus Jones, for nearly two years.

    Currently, Howard’s LinkedIn account lists her as a policy advisor in cyber security for DCMS.

    But Howard previously worked for UKIP at the European parliament and it is during this time that she formed connections with concerning groups.

    An anonymous source has shown The Canary documents which list Howard, alongside others, who worked in coalition with UKIP under the Eurosceptic Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) group. These documents show that Howard worked for UKIP during UKIP’s involvement in the EFDD.

    During the eighth European Parliament (2014-2019) the EFDD was made up of several right-wing parties, including the far-right Sweden Democrats. The Sweden Democrats have neo-Nazi roots, and one of its founders was a member of the Waffen SS. As of summer 2021, it held 60 seats out of a possible 349 in the Swedish parliament. The party claims to have divested from its Nazi roots. But it’s also expressed the view that Islam is the biggest threat since WWII. It additionally wants to bring immigration down to nearly zero.

    Suspension

    Our sources also provided The Canary with a photo showing Howard posing, amongst other UKIP staffers, with a member of the Sweden Democrats. In 2016, Hope not Hate published an article that featured UKIP figures, including Howard, with Carl Joel Ankar. As Hope not Hate wrote:

    Pictured above is Carl Joel Ankar, formerly of the extreme-right Sweden Democrats, enjoying a drink with key UKIP organisers Jamie Illingworth and Francesca Howard. The jolly scene was uploaded as EFDD/UKIP staffer David McClure’s Facebook cover photo on 29 May 2016.

    The Sweden Democrats is a far-right party that had to ban members from wearing Nazi uniforms to their meetings in 1996.

    In documents seen by The Canary, an EFDD staff register lists both Howard and Ankar. The same article from Hope not Hate explains Ankar’s background:

    Ankar was first investigated by European Parliament authorities following comments made on the hate website Flashback in which he called his former teacher “Jewish swine”, expressed support for apartheid and blamed domestic abuse victims for their “inability to absorb verbal criticism”. He has also written online that he trained to be a lawyer in order to better prosecute “leftish muppets and crooked Jews”.

    The Canary reached out to DCMS with questions. We asked why Howard was able to take up a position in government having associated with far-right figures. A DCMS spokesperson said:

    We do not comment on staffing matters.
    Current role

    Public trust in civil servants is at an all time low. From PPE contract-related cronyism to scandals about government staff (from press officers to civil servants to MPs) breaking lockdown rules, there is a massive erosion of public trust for those in office.

    Howard’s appointment to DCMS only adds to this lack of trust. It also raises a fundamental question. Given the background checks needed to work at parliament, it should be inconceivable that Howard’s background wasn’t examined. If that is the case, did DCMS take any steps to ensure that Howard no longer associates with far-right figures? Or perhaps, more worryingly, they just didn’t care.

    Featured image via screenshot.

    By Maryam Jameela

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • In news that will anger a lot of people, banks look set to give their staff the biggest bonuses since the 2007-08 financial crash. At a time when the rest of us face a huge cost of living crisis, the banks’ actions will probably turn your stomach.

    Bankers: laughing all the way to the…

    The Guardian reported on bankers’ bonuses and pay. It noted that:

    • Mergers and acquisitions bankers got fees of £2.6bn in 2021. These bankers advise on company mergers.
    • HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds and NatWest are “expected” to say they’re paying out £4bn in bonuses.
    • 3,519 UK bankers earned more than £835,000 in 2021.
    • NatWest is expected to announce £4bn in profit for 2021 – while the public still own over 50% of it.
    • Overall, banks profits are expected to be £34bn – the highest since 2007.

    Meanwhile, the rest of us are in the shit.

    A crisis for the rest of us

    As The Canary previously reported, the UK is facing its biggest cost of living crisis in recent years:

    • 2.5 million families are struggling to pay rent and heat their homes.
    • 15% of households live in food insecurity.
    • 4% of households have used a foodbank.

    In the coming months, things will get worse:

    • The Department for Work and Pensions is making a real terms cut to people’s social security.
    • Inflation is predicted to hit 7%.
    • Energy companies are putting prices up by over £600 a year.
    • The Tories are hiking national insurance by over 10%.
    • Over two million people could be destitute – the most extreme form of poverty.

    Of course, all this comes after a decade of austerity – one which the bankers caused.

    A decade of chaos

    Successive governments cut 14% of all public sector spending in the last decade. This hit people reliant on social security particularly hard. Because Tory reform of the Department for Work and Pensions in 2016 led to policies like the:

    • Benefit cap: £1.62bn cut.
    • Benefit freeze: £10.2bn cut; 30% of households saw a reduction in money.
    • Two child limit: £5.35bn cut, affecting 3.8 million families.
    • “Abolition of £30 a week support for disabled people who were unfit for work (ESA WRAG)”: £1.365bn cut, affecting half a million disabled and sick people.

    But clearly, none of this matters to the richest people in the UK. Because while bankers are getting huge bonuses, the Tories also recently gave the banks a tax cut. It shows that shocking inequality still exists in the UK. And it also shows that our country is still one of the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’.

    Featured image via DAVID ILIFF – Wikimedia, license: CC BY-SA 3.0

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • BBC News‘s coverage of prince Andrew Windsor buying his way out of child sexual assault allegations has provoked uproar. It’s because of the reporting of royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell. People have branded him and the BBC a “disgrace“. And when you see Witchell’s report, it’s of little wonder.

    Andrew Windsor: gaslighting survivors?

    PA reported that on Tuesday 15 February a US court said Windsor and child sexual assault survivor Virginia Giuffre had settled out of court. Giuffre’s lawyer David Boies wrote jointly with Windsor’s lawyers to say that the parties had “reached a settlement in principle”.

    Court documents show, PA said, that Windsor will make a “substantial donation to Giuffre’s charity in support of victims’ rights”. He has also pledged to “demonstrate his regret for his association with Epstein” by supporting the “fight against the evils of sex trafficking, and by supporting its victims”.

    In other words, Windsor has paid-off Giuffre to make the allegations go away. And his comments about ‘fighting the evils of sex trafficking’ have essentially gaslighted survivors. Because as journalist Mark Acheson pointed out, Windsor should have been doing this “from the very start” – if he’s innocent, of course. But then the BBC got involved – and made the situation even more disgraceful.

    BBC: disgraceful reporting

    Royal correspondent Witchell gave his assessment of the story. He posed the question no-one was asking:

    Could there be a route back to public life for Andrew?

    In most people’s eyes, Windsor – who didn’t initially apologise to survivors for his friendship with child rapist Jeffery Epstein – shouldn’t have a way back into public life; in fact, many would argue that prison may be a better place for him. But Witchell posed the question anyway. He continued regarding Windsor’s return to public life:

    It is… very hard to see that. I mean, let’s be honest about it: he’s been shown to have very poor judgement, he’s… a liability, and frankly what charity would want him?

    Giuffre has not withdrawn her allegations that Windsor is a perpetrator of child sexual assault. So, “poor judgement” is quite the understatement from Witchell.

    Disrespecting survivors

    Twitter reacted accordingly to Witchell’s deeply unpleasant reporting:

    This sycophantic royal reporting by the BBC is nothing new. But even by its low standards, Witchell’s appalling take disrespected child sexual abuse survivors everywhere.

    Featured image via BBC iPlayer – screengrabs

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The poorest households are taking another hit to their finances. People could see broadband bills rise by 10% this year. It comes amid the ongoing Tory-enabled cost of living crisis and is yet another blow to households already struggling.

    Cost of living: the crisis

    The UK is facing its biggest cost of living crisis in recent years. As The Canary has already documented:

    • 2.5 million families are struggling to pay rent and heat their homes.
    • 15% of households live in food insecurity.
    • 4% of households have used a foodbank.

    In the coming months, things will get worse:

    • The Department for Work and Pensions is making a real terms cut to people’s social security.
    • Inflation is predicted to hit 7%.
    • Energy companies are putting prices up by over £600 a year.
    • The Tories are hiking national insurance by over 10%.
    • Over two million people could be destitute – the most extreme form of poverty.

    And now, another area of people’s lives is set to become even more unaffordable – potentially impacting many other areas.

    Communications: spiralling prices

    Ofcom is the communications regulator. It deals with television, radio, internet, and telecommunications. On Tuesday 15 February, it released a report into how affordable communications services are. Ofcom’s findings showed that the price of mobile phones and broadband was also impacting the overall cost of living crisis. As the Guardian reported, Ofcom warned that mobile, telephone, and broadband bills could go up by over 10% this year. Based on an average bill, this would see households facing a yearly rise of just under £40.

    This higher than inflation increase comes against a backdrop of people already struggling to keep up with their bills. Ofcom found that:

    • 1.1m households (5%) are struggling with the affordability of their broadband. This included people cancelling services, missing payments, or cutting back on food to pay for it.
    • 1m (4%) households are struggling with the affordability of their smart phone.

    Predictably, it was the poorest households and those reliant on social security who struggled the most. Ofcom said that 11% of them were struggling with the affordability of broadband with 3% of low-income households cancelling services because they couldn’t afford them. Moreover, over 1m households (5%) don’t even have home broadband. They rely on mobile data for internet access or other devices. And 7% of this group struggled with these costs.

    Social tariffs

    Ofcom says part of the solution to broadband being too expensive is social tariffs. As it noted:

    Special discounted broadband packages… are available to an estimated 4.2 million households in receipt of Universal Credit.

    But only 55,000 homes have taken advantage of these discounted rates so far – just 1.2 per cent of those eligible. That means that millions of benefits recipients are missing out on an average annual broadband saving of £144 each.

    Currently there are eight social tariffs available. Some of them are also available to people claiming other types of social security. But the prices and speeds of connection vary:

    List of broadband social tariffs

    Ofcom says that 84% of social security claimants don’t even know about social tariffs. This is despite 6.8m households potentially being entitled to them.

    Wider implications

    Moreover, if people struggle to pay phone and broadband bills and get cut off, this will directly impact on other areas. For example, take the “out-of-work” Universal Credit claimant who Ofcom says spends 8.3% of their disposable income on broadband. They have to manage their social security claim online, so no internet or mobile data would mean chaos.

    Historically, if you didn’t have internet access you could visit a library. But with Tory-led austerity closing over 800 libraries as of 2019, this is becoming less of an option. For children, the effect on education has also been stark, highlighted further by the pandemic. As Ofcom wrote:

    4% [of children] relied solely on mobile internet access during the pandemic – with 2% only able to get online using a smartphone. School-aged children from the most financially vulnerable homes (5%) were more likely than those in the least financially vulnerable households (2%) to have mobile-only access.

    Additionally, around one in five children (17%) did not have consistent access to a suitable device for their online home-learning. This increased to 27% of children from households classed as most financially vulnerable.

    And none of this addresses the 3.3 million people in 2020 who had still never even used the internet. This figure includes two million chronically ill and disabled people.

    A perfect storm for the poorest people

    Struggling to eat, heat, and fuel their homes, the poorest people were already facing social exclusion, financial devastation, and overall socioeconomic hardship. Now, with the added impact of potentially no internet access, the situation for some of the most deprived and marginalised people in the UK is looking even more desperate.

    So, community support and cohesion is crucial. We all need to be active in our local areas – offering mutual aid where needed and ensuring as few people as possible fall through the ever increasing cracks in a system collapsing in on itself.

    Featured image via Frantisek_Krejci – Pixabay

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Tories were trotting out lies and misleading stats about employment across social media on Tuesday 15 February. Fortunately, a trade union organisation was on hand to correct their falsehoods.

    Latest employment stats: not good

    Conservative Party social media has been focusing on employment. This is because the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published new jobs data for the UK. ONS headline figures showed:

    • The UK employment rate was estimated at 75.5%… 1.0 percentage points lower than before the coronavirus pandemic (December 2019 to February 2020).
    • The UK unemployment rate was estimated at 4.1%… 0.1 percentage points higher than before the coronavirus pandemic.
    • The UK economic inactivity rate was estimated at 21.2%… 1.0 percentage point higher than before the coronavirus pandemic.
    Real terms wages: fucked

    Meanwhile, real terms wages (how people’s pay tracks with inflation) have flatlined. As a graph from Sky News showed, the money people earn has been stagnating for years:

    A graph showing real terms wages

    And the ONS backed this up. As it reported, while actual pay has increased:

    In real terms (adjusted for inflation), in October to December 2021, total and regular pay fell on the year at negative 0.1% for total pay and negative 0.8% for regular pay.

    People in work: disastrous

    It also said the number of people employed by companies was up by about 400,000 pre-pandemic:

    A graph showing the total number of payrolled employees

    But the number of self-employed people was down by over 850,000:

    A graph showing the total number of people working by employment type

    Seems clear, yes? Well – not if your the Tories’ social media. Because it completely misrepresented the facts.

    The Tories? ‘Everything’s great!’

    As it tweeted:

    As the info in this article shows, the Tories’ claims are either lies or misleading. Luckily, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) was on it.

    As the TUC tweeted:

    The TUC was not the only one correcting the Tories’ falsified post:

    Some people were very to-the-point:

    Never trust one

    There’s an old saying which goes: ‘never trust a Tory’. It seems that under Boris Johnson and Co. that phrase remains as true as ever.

    Featured image via Sky News – YouTube and the Conservative Party – Twitter 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A former Post Office worker has told of how she was left homeless with her then young daughter after being wrongfully convicted due to flaws with the computer system.

    Scandalous treatment

    Lisa Brennan, is among more than 700 subpostmasters and subpostmistresses (SPMs) prosecuted based on information from the Horizon IT system, installed and maintained by Fujitsu between 2000 and 2014. In December 2019, a High Court judge ruled that Horizon contained a number of “bugs, errors and defects” and there was a “material risk” that shortfalls in Post Office branch accounts were caused by the system.

    Brennan, who was a counter clerk at a Post Office in Huyton, near Liverpool, was wrongly convicted of the theft of just over £3,000 in 2003 despite pleading not guilty. Although she avoided jail, Brennan said it was the “end” of her world, leading to financial difficulty and the end of her marriage.

    She went on:

    All I’d ever known from the age of 16 was the Post Office and then just to be told ‘you’re a thief’ is horrible.

    After the conviction, Brennan attempted to take an overdose but said “nobody really cared” or reached out because of her criminal record. She said she drank “a lot” of vodka and wine to “numb” what she had been through.

    Describing how she became homeless, Brennan said:

    I had to sell the house, I couldn’t afford the mortgage. I stayed at my mum’s on the couch and my daughter Jess just had the spare room – I was sofa surfing.

    She described relying on family members for food, and would often go hungry so her daughter could eat. Talking about her ordeal, Brennan added:

    It’s scandalous, it should never have happened. I wasn’t the only one but that’s what I was told: ‘It’s only you, you’re the only one.’ I remember them (Post Office investigators) saying that: ‘It’s only you.’

    Post Office court case
    Former subpostmasters outside the the Royal Courts of Justice, London (Stefan Rousseau/PA)

    “Broken”

    Mother-of-three Janine Powell, 50, a former subpostmistress in Tiverton in Devon, cried during the inquiry as she recounted her ordeal after being accused of stealing around £71,000. Powell revealed she felt “broken” after being sentenced to 18 months in prison in 2008 as she would have to leave her children aged 10 to 18.

    She said she spent around 23 hours a day in prison due to short staffing.

    Post box
    The victims’ ordeal was described as one of the worst miscarriages of justice in recent British history (Andrew Matthews/PA)

    Powell continued:

    It had a big impact. You have to declare obviously that you’ve got a criminal record. When you try to explain (to employers) it’s a ‘no’ straight away, so I couldn’t work.

    She self-harmed and had suicidal thoughts and her relationship with her children became strained, the probe heard.

    Staff blamed

    The inquiry, which is expected to run for the rest of this year, is looking into whether the Post Office knew about faults in the IT system and will also ask how staff were made to take the blame. Jason Beer QC, counsel to the inquiry, said during his opening that the ordeal of those affected could be concluded as “the worst miscarriage of justice in recent British legal history”.

    The inquiry also heard from Damian Owen, from Anglesey in Wales, who was the manager of a post office, was audited in 2010 and later jailed for eight months after being accused of stealing £25,000. Owen said he sought help for his mental wellbeing and began working “bottom of the rung” jobs because of his criminal record.

    Asked what he wants from the Post Office, the witness said:

    I want some decent money, a decent apology and I want there to be convictions for the people who have perpetuated the whole conspiracy inside the Post Office. You know everyone from the top down knew and were pushing the charges.”

    “Humiliated”

    Also giving evidence was mother-of-one Margery Lorraine Williams, 55, from Anglesey, Wales, who tearfully said she was left to pick up a bill of just over £14,000 because of the system fault. She had owned her post office in Llanddaniel Fab near Llangefni since 2009, but in 2011 auditors suspended her licence before she was convicted of four counts of fraud.

    Williams told the inquiry she had pleaded guilty because she did not want to go to jail and leave behind her daughter, who was 10 at the time. She spoke of being “humiliated” after receiving a 52-week prison term suspended for 18 months.

    Williams said:

    It was horrendous because it was like a little village for us and my daughter had grown up there from one to the age of nearly 11.

    Asked what she wants from the Post Office, Williams added:

    I want them to go to jail for what they’ve done, but then that would be an easy life for them. They’d come out and still have their money. I want them to feel the way I felt and the way I have struggled financially.

    By The Canary

  • A ruling that then health secretary Matt Hancock did not comply with a public sector equality duty when making appointments during the pandemic is “incredibly significant”, according to a think tank boss.

    “Incredibly significant”

    The Runnymede Trust, an independent race equality think tank, won a High Court fight after complaining about government appointments made during the pandemic. Two judges ruled that Hancock did not comply with a public sector equality duty when appointing Conservative peer baroness Dido Harding and Mike Coupe, a former colleague of Harding, to posts in 2020.

    Lord justice Singh and justice Swift granted a declaration to the Runnymede Trust on 15 February after considering arguments at a High Court hearing in December. Judges concluded that Hancock had not complied with “the public sector equality duty” in relation to the decisions to appoint Harding as interim executive chairwoman of the National Institute for Health Protection (NIHP) in August 2020, and Coupe as director of testing for NHS Test and Trace (NHSTT) in September 2020.

    Dr Halima Begum, the trust’s chief executive, said:

    The judgment handed down today by the High Court is incredibly significant to the British people.

    It shows the importance of the public sector equality duty and its role in protecting the people of this nation from the closed shop of Government appointments, not least in a time of national crisis where people from our minority communities were dying from Covid in hugely disproportionate numbers.

    This case should never have required litigation given how self-evident it is that compliance with the law does not allow members of the executive to simply appoint their friends to senior public sector jobs without giving, at a bare minimum, due consideration to the Equality Act.

    NHS Test and Trace programme report
    Baroness Dido Harding (Aaron Chown/PA)

    Good Law

    Campaign group the Good Law Project took legal action alongside the trust against Hancock and prime minister Boris Johnson. It complained about other appointments and argued that the government had not adopted an “open” process when making appointments to posts “critical to the pandemic response”. Judges dismissed the Good Law Project’s claim.

    Lawyers representing the two organisations suggested that people “outside the tight circle” in which senior Conservative politicians and their friends moved were not being given opportunities. Ministers disputed the claims against them.

    Mike Coupe
    Mike Coupe (PA)

    Singh and Swift said in a written ruling:

    It is the process leading up to the two decisions which has been found by this court to be in breach of the public sector equality duty.

    For those reasons we will grant a declaration to the Runnymede Trust that the secretary of state for health and social care did not comply with the public sector equality duty in relation to the decisions how to appoint Baroness Harding as interim executive chair of the NIHP in August 2020 and Mr Coupe as director of testing for NHSTT in September 2020.

    Jo Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, said:

    Change doesn’t happen, things don’t get better for those who are disadvantaged, unless those in power care.

    That means making sure they ask themselves, ‘how do I level society up for the disabled and ethnic minorities?’

    And it means taking the time to find the best people – not the best-connected people – for the job.

    Some argue that rather than just placing different people into the same positions, the NHS needs to break away from the privatisation politics of recent Labour and Conservative governments:

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A video shows a five-year-old playing with a gun watched over by a uniformed man from a neo-Nazi organisation. You could be forgiven for thinking this BBC footage was from Louis Theroux’s new documentarForbidden America. But you’d be wrong.

    In fact, this footage was broadcast immediately after Theroux’s documentary about the far-right in the US, on the BBC Weekend News. But unlike Theroux’s expose, this news item failed to mention that the group it platformed is a neo-Nazi organisation known for ultranationalism, anti-semitism, and Nazi iconography.

    The Azov Regiment

    As part of the BBC‘s coverage of the situation in Ukraine, journalist Orla Guerin reported on people preparing for invasion. The segment covered a training afternoon for civilians organised by the National Guard. But it neglected to tell viewers that it was the Azov Regiment – formerly the Azov Battalion – that ran the training event.

    Azov was formed in 2014. Its first commander Andriy Biletsky is now the leader of the far-right ultranationalist National Corps party. In 2010, Biletsky stated that Ukraine’s mission was to:

    lead the white races of the world in a final crusade … against Semite-led Untermenschen [subhumans].

    Azov’s links to neo-Nazi ideology are well documented. Even the Sun ran an article in January describing it as “neo-Nazi militia”. The paper further stated that:

    On the Azov Battalion-affiliated Thule Signal Telegram channel, openly racist jokes and memes are posted.

    The US State Department described the group as a “nationalist hate group”, and it’s banned on Facebook.

    Enter the BBC

    Despite these well-known links, the BBC uncritically visited the Azov training afternoon. It depicted young and old people learning how to fire guns, including “a granny with a gun”. And, perhaps most worryingly, it interviewed an Azov major. Over the footage of the earlier-mentioned five-year-old, Guerin narrates that there’s “a sense of peril for Ukraine and its people, like 5-year-old…”. She continues her dramatic voiceover, stating there’s a “sense that danger is closing in”.

    Yet not once does Guerin mention the dangers of the organisation they’re training with. She simply describes Azov as the “national guard”. The soldier who she interviews is captioned as a “Major” with the “National Guard”.

    Euro News also covered the same training event. But the difference is that it headlined its article:

    Ukraine far-right group offers training to civilians

    You can watch the BBC segment here:

    No excuses

    Even if Azov’s links to the far-right weren’t so widely documented, there is no excuse for the BBC not giving its viewers any background information on the organisation it platformed. Moreover, the BBC itself has reported on those links in the past. A 2014 BBC article contains this description of Azov:

    Run by the extremist Patriot of Ukraine organisation, which considers Jews and other minorities “sub-human” and calls for a white, Christian crusade against them, it sports three Nazi symbols on its insignia: a modified Wolf’s Hook, a black sun (or “Hakensonne”) and the title Black Corps, which was used by the Waffen SS.

    The same article also states:

    As a result, the question of the presence of the far-right in Ukraine remains a highly sensitive issue, one which top officials and the media shy away from. No-one wants to provide fuel to the Russian propaganda machine.

    You couldn’t make it up.

    The Canary contacted the BBC for a response, but it declined to comment.

    Gross negligence or gross manipulation?

    At best, the BBC‘s coverage could be gross negligence. It reported on an event and didn’t bother to question who was running it. At worst, it was gross manipulation, deliberately ignoring Azov’s far-right connections in favour of dramatic footage of people ready to arms themselves to fight against the evil Russian invaders.

    Either way, the BBC has a responsibility to its viewers that it didn’t uphold in this piece. According to Ofcom in 2020, the BBC  “remains the most-used news source”. 56% of adults get their news from BBC One. And according to its charter, the BBC should:

    act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output..

    With its segment on Ukraine, the BBC failed to do this. Instead, it platformed dangerous racists without comment. Whatever its reasons, this is simply not good enough.

    Featured image via screengrab/YouTube/BBC News 

    By Emily Apple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A new review of 10 years of healthcare research has found “stark ethnic inequalities” affecting parts of the health system including mental health services and the pay levels of ethnic minority staff.

    “Race inequity”

    The review was first reported in the Guardian and seen by the PA news agency. It recorded inequalities in every field it studied: mental healthcare, maternal and neonatal healthcare, digital access to healthcare, genetic testing and genomic medicine, and the NHS workforce.

    The Observatory director Dr Habib Naqvi said the review made a:

    clear and overwhelming case for radical action on race inequity in our healthcare system.

    He added:

    It is clear that existing evidence on the stark health inequalities faced by ethnic minority communities has not led to significant change.

    This is why the Observatory has been established: to synthesise what already exists, translate it into actionable policy recommendations, and to challenge leaders to act.

    The report said the impact of racism within the NHS workforce included evidence of a pay gap affecting “black, Asian, mixed and other groups”. And during the pandemic, coronavirus (Covid-19) infections were higher in ethnic minority staff. Some of the the largest inequalities were recorded in mental healthcare.

    It found GPs were less likely to refer ethnic minority patients to the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme compared to white patients. Moreover, Black children were 10 times more likely to be referred to mental health services via social services than a GP compared to white children.

    The review of maternal healthcare found evidence of negative interactions, stereotyping, disrespect, discrimination, and cultural insensitivity. This led to some ethnic minority women feeling ‘othered’, unwelcome, and poorly cared-for.

    The time is now

    Lead investigator Dr Dharmi Kapadia from the University of Manchester said “the time for critical action” was now. She said:

    For too many years, the health of ethnic minority people has been negatively impacted by a lack of high-quality ethnic monitoring data recorded in NHS systems; lack of appropriate interpreting services for people who do not speak English confidently and delays in, or avoidance of, seeking help for health problems due to fear of racist treatment from NHS healthcare professionals.

    Our review confirmed that all of these issues are still to be tackled by the NHS. The evidence on the poor healthcare outcomes for many ethnic minority groups across a range of services is overwhelming, and convincing.

    Extensive study

    The research was conducted by the University of Manchester in conjunction with the University of Sheffield and the University of Sussex.

    Over 13,000 research papers were screened and 178 studies were included in the final review. One problem encountered by the researchers was a lack of research into ethnic experiences in a number of specific areas.

    An NHS spokesperson told the Guardian:

    The pandemic has shone a stark light on health inequalities across the country and the NHS is already taking action to improve the experiences of patients and access to services.

    The NHS has set out what local health services should be focusing on over the next year so they can make these improvements in their local communities and is already working closely with the Race and Health Observatory to drive forward the recommendations set out in this report.

    The report. which is expected to be published in full later this week, urges further ‘critical action’ to be undertaken by organisations including NHS England, NHS Improvement and NHS Digital.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Around one in 25 people in the UK working in social care, teaching, and education were likely to have been self-isolating because of coronavirus (Covid-19) at the end of January, new figures show. At the same time, the government moved England from the more stringent Plan B restrictions to the less stringent Plan A.

    England

    Some 4.0% of social care workers were self-isolating on 29 January, up from 2.3% two weeks earlier. Meanwhile 3.9% of teaching and education staff were also self-isolating, up from 2.0%. These were the highest estimates of self-isolation among all parts of the workforce. And for the teaching sector, they climbed above the level seen at the peak of the Omicron wave in early January, which was 3.5%.

    Around the same time – on 27 January – the government moved England back to Plan A restrictions. It said at the time:

    because of the success of the booster roll-out, all measures under Plan B have been lifted.

    At the end of January, deaths were still considerably higher than when the UK went into Plan B on 8 December. Cases, albeit significantly down, were still higher than 8 December.

    The latest figures on self-isolation, which have been published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), are the first of their kind to estimate the proportion of people self-isolating in different types of employment.

    Along with teaching and social care, levels of self-isolation rose among health care workers, up from 2.1% on 15 January to 3.6% by 29 January. There were signs of increases across all other work sectors, but these trends “remain uncertain”, the ONS said.

    The retail sector had the lowest estimated percentage of the workforce in self-isolation, at 2.2%, up from 1.5%.

    The figures also show that by 29 January, 2.7% – around one in 37 – of the entire working-age population in England were likely to be in self-isolation. Whereas at the peak of the Omicron wave on 3 January, nearly one in 20 – 4.7% – were in self-isolation.

    The devolved nations

    There’s a similar pattern in the other three nations. Although self-isolation levels vary considerably, and there’s “high uncertainty” about the trend in the most recent two weeks, the ONS said.

    • In Scotland, the proportion of people of working age who were self-isolating peaked at 6.4% on 2 January, or around one in 16, the highest level experienced by any nation so far in the recent wave of infections. By 21 January, this had fallen to 1.8%, but then started to rise at the end of month, reaching 2.4% by 29 January.
    • Wales saw a peak of 4.2% of the working-age population in self-isolation on 1 January, dropping to 1.7% by 17 January, then increasing to 2.7% by 29 January.
    • In Northern Ireland levels peaked at 4.0% on 2 January, fell to 2.3% by 16 January, and stood at 2.7% on 29 January.

    All estimates are based on data collected as part of the ONS weekly Covid-19 infection survey, and are based on individuals in private households.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Recent developments on the US side of the Atlantic have given wolves a reason to howl with joy. On the UK side of the ocean, however, eagles have less reason to celebrate. That’s after news emerged about two eagles turning up dead, allegedly on shooting estates.

    Welcome reprieve for some wolves

    Donald Trump made many anti-wildlife and anti-environment moves in office. One of them was the axing of endangered species protections for wolves. In doing so, he was following in a not-so-great US tradition. Since George W Bush’s presidency, all administrations have advocated for stripping wolves of protections, the Seattle Times has pointed out.

    Furthermore, Trump’s successor Joe Biden hasn’t reinstated protections for wolves, despite pressure to do so. That failure has meant states and trophy killers have been merrily colluding to mow wolves down in their hundreds. In early 2021, for example, Wisconsin set a quota for hunters to kill 119 wolves over a week-long period. They killed at least 216 wolves in just 60 hours.

    But a judge recently delivered a welcome reprieve to wolves in a number of US states. Ruling in a lawsuit Earthjustice brought on behalf of multiple wildlife-focused organisations, US district judge Jeffrey White restored protections for wolves:

    The judgement doesn’t cover all wolves in the US, however. Wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming remain at risk. That’s because they lost their protections prior to Trump’s delisting decision.

    In May 2021, the Center for Biological Diversity and others petitioned the US government to restore these wolves’ protections. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is currently reviewing the matter. And campaigners are continuing the pressure to make that happen:

    Raptor persecution… again

    Unfortunately, the news wasn’t so good for winged predators in the UK this week. Dorset Police announced that “multi-agency operations” in the south of England have recovered the dead bodies of two white-tailed eagles. They found one of the bodies in Dorset in January. Both BirdGuides and Raptor Persecution UK reported that the authorities found the eagles on shooting estates. The eagles were part of an Isle of Wight reintroduction project.

    Raptor Persecution UK, written by raptor conservationist Ruth Tingray, argued that the involvement of multiple agencies in the operations is a “clear indication” of suspected criminality. She also said there’s “huge concern” for the welfare of three other white-tailed eagles in Dorset at present.

    The existence of Tingray’s website is a testament to the fact that raptor persecution is a big problem in the UK. Shooting estates are by far the most commonly implicated perpetrators of this persecution. Just recently, NatureScot sanctioned a Scottish shooting estate after a golden eagle died of poisoning there. Birds of prey aren’t particularly good for shooting interests, as the former can disrupt the latter’s killing operations.

    As wildlife campaigner, devoted birder, and creator of the Off The Leash podcast Charlie Moores told The Canary:

    We may never know the true scale of raptor persecution on shooting estates, but what we can say with certainty is that it has almost wiped out the Hen Harrier as a breeding species in England, has limited the expansion of Golden Eagles into the Scottish lowlands and stopped them moving across the border into England, has restricted the population of Goshawks, and is actively looking to control the number of Buzzards.

    Leading by bad example

    Despite the scale of the problem, Dorset MP Chris Loder has publicly stated he doesn’t want the police to “spend time and resources” on investigating the white-tailed eagle deaths:

    Loder’s comments provoked hefty pushback, including from a wildlife crime investigator:

    The MP responded to the furore by characterising raptors as lamb killers and sharing an article that pictured eagles with lambs in their claws. Unfortunately for the MP, the photographer responsible for snapping some of those pictures has pointed to the fact that they staged them with a captive eagle and an already dead lamb:

     

    So all in all, a mixed week for predators of different shapes and sizes. Some wolves are thankfully better off. While some magnificent birds have tragically, and possibly illegally, been sent to an early grave. And what of the most dangerous predator of all? It seems the so-called leaders among us continue to fall far short of expectations.

    Featured image of wolf via Bo Mertz / Flickr, cropped to 378×403 pixels, licensed under CC BY 2.0. Featured image of eagle via Susanne Nilsson / Flickr, cropped to 384×403 pixels, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

    By Tracy Keeling

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Actor and comedian Alexei Sayle was informed by a lawyer via email that he was named in a document by Special Branch (SB), Britain’s political police. In a podcast, Sayle discusses this matter further. Documents show that other well-known figures are named too.

    The revelation shines a light on the sinister activities of undercover policing which took place over decades and are still a part of our lives.

    Sayle had a Special Branch file

    In his podcast, Sayle and lawyer Paul Heron discuss how the actor is named in an SB document. That document now forms part of the Undercover Policing Inquiry (UCPI). Heron is a lawyer with the Public Interest Legal Centre (PILC) and represents a number of core participants to the inquiry.

    Heron tells Sayle that Sayle was of interest to SB because of a gig he did in 1982 in support of the Right To Work campaign. He also says that an SB file was opened on Sayle.

    The podcast also features Helen Steel, who is an activist and core participant in the UCPI. Steel goes on to explain how she was targeted by ‘John Barker’. His real name is John Dines, an undercover police officer with the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), which was a “Special Branch Unit established in the late 1960s” and a unit of the Met police.

    Dines formed a sexual relationship with Steel so as to provide cover for his surveillance ops.

    The Sayle document

    The formerly classified SB document, now lodged with the UCPI, that names Sayle is stamped ‘Box 500’, the informal name for MI5. The document is a report into a planned Right To Work Campaign march and picketing over five days in London.

    The document lists Sayle as part of the entertainment on the fourth night. It mentions Sayle again with others – including Attila The Stockbroker (a punk poet) – on the last two pages.

    From the Beatles to ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ to CoE General Synod

    Another SB document concerned the planning by London co-ordinators of the Troops Out Movement (TOM) for a rally. According to a submission by PILC, TOM argued:

    that the withdrawal of the British military from Northern Ireland was an essential precursor to peace. They argued that the bombings, the sectarian murders, the carnage that blighted the lives of the people of Northern Ireland and Britain would not end until the British troops were out.

    The SB document mentions that speakers invited to the rally included musician John Lennon and actor Peter O’Toole. It added, however, that Lennon declined the offer and O’Toole did not reply.

    Yet another SB document concerns events in the north of Ireland. In this document, it’s noted that the reverend Paul Oestreicher agreed to participate in any “anti-recruitment campaign undertaken by the Troops Out Movement”. Oestreicher is a peace activist and member of the General Synod of the Church of England.

    Others on MI5’s radar

    Separately, former MI5 officer Annie Machon stated that individuals “worthy of MI5 investigation” included:

    John Lennon, Jack Straw MP, Ted Heath MP, Tam Dalyell MP, Gareth Peirce (solicitor), Jeremy Corbyn MP, Mike Mansfield (barrister), Geoffrey Robertson (barrister), Patricia Hewitt MP, Harriet Harman MP,  Garry Bushell (journalist), Peter Mandelson (European commissioner), Peter Hain MP, Clare Short MP, Mark Thomas (comedian), Mo Mowlam (politician), Arthur Scargill (NUM leader, who famously had his own recording category: unaffiliated subversive)

    Lennon had file too

    A certain ‘Rick Gibson’ was referred to in the document about TOM. Gibson’s real name was Richard Clark – full name detective constable Richard Layton Clark. He was with the SDS and is now deceased.

    Clark’s undercover work was audacious: to gain credibility, he set up and ran a branch of TOM. Furthermore, he “encouraged and organised demonstrations, such as the picketing of the local Woolwich barracks and the homes of local MPs”.

    Clark also had sexual relationships with at least two women activists, including ‘Mary’, to provide cover for his surveillance operations. He eventually took up a position on TOM’s National Secretariat.

    In the same document, Lennon is again mentioned, and this time it’s stated there was an SB file on him.

    Consequences

    Clark went on to infiltrate Big Flame, but his false identity was revealed by activists.

    The UCPI released a September 1982 SB report which also referred to a list of TOM subscribers who went on to become members. It was signed off by chief superintendent “HN68” (Sean Lynch) and copied to Box 500.

    UCO “HN96” (aka Michael James) also infiltrated TOM and the Socialist Workers Party. He went on to become TOM’s membership and affiliation secretary.

    In a submission by Heron and other lawyers to the UCPI, there’s evidence to show that a TOM branch member who wasn’t an undercover operative was possibly blacklisted. This branch member, Richard Chessum, was unable to obtain employment despite his qualifications.

    SB collusion on blacklisting

    The Economic League was an agency, funded by businesses, to hold files on workers so they can be blacklisted (deprived of work, usually because of trade union activism).

    A leaked Economic League (EL) report, marked ‘Strictly Private and Confidential’, highlights the League’s collusion with SB going back decades, as this extract shows:

    Economic League document

    Spies At Work author and League Watch co-founder* Mike Hughes pointed out:

    The Economic League’s blacklisting overlapped with the state’s domestic intelligence services. The most clear cut example of this common ground would be in MI5. …

    We know, definitely that in the years before the Second World War the League supplied and received information from Special Branch and Naval Intelligence and that during the General Strike it was reporting to the Prime Minister.

    The Reuben report into blacklisting also confirmed that UK Special Branches were in contact with the EL:

    Operation Reuben

    In 2013, the Independent Police Complaints Commission confirmed it was likely that “all special branches were involved in providing information” for blacklisting purposes. And in 2018, Met police admitted to collusion in the blacklisting of workers.

    This celebrity was jailed then blacklisted

    It’s also known that the SDS spied on trade union activists over decades.

    Indeed, another celebrity who, in a previous life, was targeted by the police for picketing and was subsequently blacklisted was actor/comedian Ricky Tomlinson. He was sentenced to two years in prison.

    In February 2021, The Canary reported on evidence that showed collusion between a Foreign Office funded research agency, MI5, a TV documentary producer and prime minister Edward Heath to ensure the conviction of Tomlinson and other pickets.

    Not just history

    In 2014, it was estimated by the police watchdog that 1,200 undercover police officers had been operating across England and Wales. Also, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary revealed that a massive 3,466 undercover operations had taken place between 2009 and 2013 alone.

    More recently, the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (CHIS) Act, which passed into law in 2021, controversially authorises sources to commit criminal acts in certain circumstances.

    We are seeing history repeat itself, and the dark, sinister forces of the state and its agents in the police have not gone away.

    Featured image via Flickr Commons / Chris Boland;CC BY-SA 2.0 license; cropped to 770×403 pixels

    *Author of this article was also a co-founder of League Watch.

    By Tom Coburg

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Protests were held in several regions on Saturday 12 February to highlight the injustice of of the cost of living crisis.

    The People’s Assembly co-ordinated the demonstrations, supported by trade unions, in towns and cities around the UK.

    ‘Tax the rich’

    Placards held aloft in Parliament Square in central London read “tax the rich”. Placards also carried other messages objecting to a rise in energy prices.

    People in Parliament Square made their feelings known
    People in Parliament Square made their feelings known (David Parry/PA)

    In Newcastle, a placard referred to “Tory tricksters”. Meanwhile another sign held next to a baby said “I can do a better job than Boris”.

     

    Cost of living crisis protest
    Crowds gathered in Newcastle (Owen Humphreys/PA)

     

    Laura Pidcock, national secretary of the People’s Assembly, said there’s “real anger” at what she described as a “growing crisis”.

    The former Labour MP added:

    Working people could not be working harder and yet life is getting so much more difficult.

    People can see clearer than ever the inequality in our society, that while there are companies making massive profits and the richest individuals are getting so much richer, everybody else is having to suffer…

    Older people will be cold in their homes, people will be struggling to feed their children, when none of this is a crisis of their making.

    Meanwhile, the Government sits by and does nothing to help the people. So, we will be out on the streets saying enough is enough.

    Cost of living crisis protest
    Placards were waved in Parliament Square, central London (David Parry/PA)

    ‘People are fed up’

    Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, said protests are taking place because “people are fed up of rich men telling them that they have to pay for boardroom greed and colossal market failure”.

    She said:

    This crisis was not caused by working people and we are not going to take wage cuts to pay for it.

    Why should the public always bail out the markets and policy makers? Where firms can pay, they should pay and under my watch Unite will unashamedly continue to protect the living standards of its members.

    Cost of living crisis protest
    A protest was held in Bristol (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Moreover, Fran Heathcote, president of the Public and Commercial Services union, said:

    Low-paid workers cannot and will not pay for the Government’s problems.

    The hike in heating bills, fuel, transport costs and national insurance contributions, at the same time as pay is held down and pensions are being attacked, leaves most workers with a real cost of living crisis.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Founder of police monitoring group Bristol Copwatch John Pegram is launching a case against Avon & Somerset Police. It’s on the grounds that the force is in breach of data protection laws. And he’s currently raising funds to ensure that he can take the force to court.

    Data protection breach

    Pegram seeks to challenge his inaccurate record on the Police National Computer (PNC) – the nationwide database for criminal records information.

    The PNC entry concerns a conviction for assaulting a police officer during a protest in 2018. The protest was against a fascist English Defence League (EDL) rally in Bristol. Pegram told The Canary that officers arrested him after warning him to remove his face covering.

    He was convicted of assaulting a police constable. He subsequently appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeal and the High Court. While the conviction was upheld, the High Court stated that:

    All the evidence was that the contact with the officer’s face was accidental, albeit the Crown Court found it was reckless.

    Even the officer involved conceded that Pegram had “not calculated to hit the officer in the face”.

    However, Pegram discovered that not only did the PNC list the wrong officer, it also gave a completely inaccurate description of what happened. It stated that he had punched the officer in the face.

    This inaccuracy means that the force is in breach of the 2018 Data Protection Act. And it’s also an inaccuracy that has far-reaching consequences. As Pegram, a mixed-race Black man, sets out in his crowdjustice appeal:

    The information on my PNC record is real time information provided to officers on the street. It’s the sort of information that is shared in intelligence briefings and could influence senior officers decision making. We need only look at how willingly the police use force against black people to understand the implications.

    Targeted by the police

    Pegram wants to take Avon & Somerset Police to court to ensure that the force corrects his criminal record. And he’s also seeking compensation for the “distress and trauma” the police’s data breach has caused. He believes officers have targeted him on a number of occasions due to being flagged as “a violent criminal” on the PNC database.

    Pegram – who frequently attends protests around the country – said:

    It’s important to put this breach right as it labels me as a dangerous person, when it comes to protest it may influence how the police treat me when I exercise my right to freedom of assembly.

    He suggests that his community organising work and his mixed-race identity may also have contributed to this harassment. 

    A spokesperson for Avon & Somerset Police told The Canary:

    Our professional standards department has investigated a number of complaints made by a man alleging officers have harassed him. Each of the incidents he’s highlighted have been assessed and the service provided was deemed to be acceptable in each, with no evidence of misconduct identified.

    Holding the force to account

    In January 2022, Bristol Copwatch issued a data rectification notice on Pegram’s behalf. The organisation raised concerns that Avon & Somerset Police is in breach of the Data Protection Act. It urged the police force to change Pegram’s criminal record to accurately reflect the 2019 High Court ruling. The force has still failed to rectify Pegram’s criminal record.

    So Pegram feels that he now has no choice but to take the force to court over the data breach. Setting out his intentions for the court case, Pegram said:

    The police must be held to account and comply with data protection regulation and my data must accurately reflect the court ruling of 2018 and 2019.

    A spokesperson for Avon & Somerset Police told The Canary:

    we continue to assess a complaint from the man relating to the accuracy of information recorded about him on the Police National Computer (PNC). Should it be necessary, we will liaise with partners including HM Courts Service and ACRO Criminal Records Office, which manages the PNC.

    Kevin Blowe, from police monitoring organisation Netpol, told The Canary:

    John’s case highlights Netpol’s long-standing concerns about the way inaccurate information retained on secretive police databases can have alarming real-world consequences. In John’s case, the wrong details on police records reinforces the stereotype of black communities as violent that is so prevalent in institutionally racist everyday policing.

    It has taken John’s enormous persistence to discover the false data that means he is routinely targeted and harassed by the police. Now, hopefully, he will raise enough funds to finally start to clear his name.

    Represented by Bindmans LLP, Pegram is raising funds to ensure that he can take the police force to court over the suspected data protection breach. Supporters can donate via his crowdjustice campaign.

    Featured image via Oli Woodman/Unsplash

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • On 8 February 2022, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Marie Anderson, released yet another report into collusion between British loyalist terror groups and the British police (RUC – Royal Ulster Constabulary) in Ireland. This time it covered the period from 1990 until 1998, the final eight years of the 30-year conflict.

    The report identified:

    significant investigative and intelligence failures and ‘collusive behaviours’ by the RUC in relation to a series of murders and attempted murders by the UDA/UFF [loyalist terror gangs] in south Belfast.

    The families of the victims of collusion feel vindicated as the Ombudsman upheld “their multiple complaints of collusion in each and every case”. This is the second Ombudsman’s report in 2022 to find “collusive behaviours” between British police and loyalist terror gangs. A legal team representing most of the families is calling for a public inquiry into the activities of Special Branch – one where retired officers will be forced to “account for their actions”. Moreover, that legal team is clear that the Ombudsman’s language means:

    Collusive behaviour is collusion, there is no distinction between the two

    This report is far from a one off

    Over the course of conflict investigations, such findings aren’t rare. Because as The Canary has extensively reported, collusion between British forces and loyalist terror gangs was widespread. So this report goes way beyond “uncomfortable reading” for the British police. Its findings, in addition to all the other revelations and allegations of collusion, dispel any myth that the British state was conducting anything other than war in Ireland for those 30 years. And it was a dirty war.

    This and other reports also show, according to justice campaigner Ciarán MacAirt, that:

    collusion was systemic across each police division and the outworking of a deliberate policy to help Loyalists murder and maim citizens, the vast majority of whom were unarmed Irish Catholic civilians.

    Regardless of the findings, and almost a quarter of a century later, the British state is still trying to bury the truth and avoid prosecutions. But justice campaigners aren’t likely to allow that to happen.

    Ombudsman findings

    Anderson’s report examined police actions related to eight loyalist attacks where 11 people were murdered. This included the five people who were murdered at the Sean Graham bookmakers on 5 February 1992.

    All these years later, this report does bring some good news for the families. It’s important they, and others still fighting for justice, are foremost in our minds. Their concerns are, in the words of the Ombudsman, “legitimate and justified”.

    Anderson, said she was “deeply concerned” by:

    the scale and scope of failings identified during ‘a protracted, complex and sensitive investigation’.

    Even though she didn’t find evidence that the RUC received information that would have allowed them to stop the eight attacks, this actually concerned her. Because given “Special Branch had a network of informants within the UDA/UFF” it should have got that information. She also found:

    instances of weapons connected to murder enquiries being disposed of in inappropriate ways, as well as evidence of records being routinely destroyed by the police.

    In a TV interview she added:

    it was police’s job to make sure that when they engage with informants that they probed, assessed, and questioned what they were doing. And the continued use of informants whom police were aware, or ought to have been aware, were involved in serious criminality and murder is in my view unforgivable…

    This was so much worse than “bad policing”

    Welcome as the specific findings are, it’s important to look at a wider picture. Solicitor for several victims’ families Niall Murphy, warned against looking at this report “in a vacuum”. Instead, Murphy said we need to:

    consider the series of reports that have been published which demonstrate and prove as a matter of fact that collusion was a state policy…

    And while the report only goes as far as saying there were “collusive behaviours” by the RUC, it’s still damning. There’s evidence that police destroyed records and murder-related weapons were disposed of. In one instance, a Browning pistol which loyalists originally stole from a British army regiment (UDR) and used in the Sean Graham bookmakers attack, was given to an informant and then later returned to the UDR. There was also the bizarre instance of another loyalist murder-related weapon being donated to the Imperial War Museum.

    So the attempts by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) (the new name for the RUC) to dismiss the Ombudsman’s findings as “bad policing” or “deficiencies and failings” are truly pathetic. Especially given the magnitude of the hard evidence and allegations about collusion between British forces and loyalist terror gangs in this conflict since at least the early 1970s.

    The nature of collusion

    Andrée Murphy from human rights NGO Relatives for Justice spoke to The Canary. She said many people feel this report is:

    the strongest report by the police ombudsman to date on the nature of collusion. And it really adds to the cumulative number of reports now that are in the public domain which confirm that collusion was not just something that happened in some incidences with some police officers with some people. This was something that was completely systemic and widespread.

    The families now expect these loyalist “mass murderers to be arrested and prosecuted”. But, according to Murphy, it’s most important those murderers don’t:

    take the place of or hide the handlers and the police officers that were involved in systemic wrong doing. We have no idea if those RUC officers were pensioned off under Patten [Chris Patten’s report that looked at police reform in the North] if they might still be in the PSNI, if they might have been brought back into the PSNI…as civilian workers.

    Murphy also believes that, based on previous reports, collusion involved the RUC Special Branch, the British army’s Force Research Unit (FRU), and security services, there now needs to be:

    a full inquiry into what happened with the three arms of the collusion stool.

    Moreover, these latest revelations of collusion appear to be a continuation of brigadier Frank Kitson’s counterinsurgency approach of the early 1970s. He believed in targeting the community around the IRA to persuade them to reject it. Using this metaphor he said:

    If a fish has got to be destroyed it can be attacked directly by rod or net . . . But if rod and net cannot succeed by themselves it may be necessary to do something to the water…

    According to Kitson, and continuing his metaphor, this could mean “polluting the water”. Kitson further asserted that:

    The law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal, in which case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public.

    Has anything changed?

    Temporary PSNI assistant chief constable Jonathan Roberts said the report showed examples of “deficiencies and failings” and “bad policing”. However, Roberts distanced present day policing from the report saying the “deficiencies and failings” related to “the handling and dissemination of intelligence by the RUC”. But the RUC was not disbanded with an entirely new police force set up in its place. It simply “became” the PSNI.

    Roberts added:

    These have been addressed by the restructuring of our intelligence systems and processes through the formation of Crime Department.

    And that:

    Policing has developed enormously over the past thirty years and the Police Service of Northern Ireland now have greatly improved policies and procedures which guide our response to potential threats and how we approach criminal investigations.

    So he’s effectively saying it’s all in the past and things are much better these days. Well, that certainly wouldn’t be the opinion of MacAirt. In the wake of the Ombudsman’s report, MacAirt, founder of legacy archive Paper Trail, tweeted:

    Andrée Murphy branded the Roberts’s comments “an utter disgrace”. She added they’re (the PSNI) “covering up for the crimes of the RUC”. Furthermore, she said the PSNI:

    actively block families from getting access to these reports, getting access to the intelligence that forms the basis of these reports, they are absolutely part of the collusion picture right now.

    Furthermore if policing really has changed why are some Irish republican communities still under the police microscope? Why are secret services still being used to target them?

    MacAirt made it clear how people in his community feel about the PSNI on legacy issues:

    Few in my community have any trust in PSNI as far as legacy investigations are concerned, as we believe that it still has many of these killers – and recent killers – on its books. The PSNI has done little over its lifespan other than prove that it is more interested in protecting the reputation of a sectarian police force in the past, than helping our families’ campaigns for truth and justice.

    In fact, the PSNI’s failure to provide information and fair, Article 2-compliant investigations as it battles our families in court, means that many of our families believe that PSNI is practically independent enough. The British courts agree in cases too.

    And as solicitor Niall Murphy said:

    rather than reflect on how brilliant they are today, why don’t they go out and arrest people?

    We won’t let the British shut this down

    MacAirt concluded:

    We want the British government to end its threat to legislate its pernicious Legacy Bill. It continues to traumatize victims and survivors because it wants to bury its war crimes, protect its killers, and deny us equal access to due process of the law.

    In a fair and just society, the killers and the dirty cops who armed and managed them would also be held accountable as we fear that where there is no accountability, it will happen again. PSNI has failed to prove that it is in any substantive way different from the RUC.

    The British establishment wants to shut reports like these down. They want the world to forget about its “dirty war” in Ireland. But campaigners aren’t going to allow that to happen. These justice campaigns will continue to pressurise British governments until they finally come clean.

    Featured image via AP Archive – YouTube Screengrab & AP Archive – YouTube Screengrab

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

  • Boris Johnson’s Tory government is cracking down even further on our internet freedoms. It’s doing it under the guise of children accessing porn. Yet the ever-clueless Guardian propped their nonsense up anyway.

    Authoritarianism under the guise of child protection

    The Tory government wants Twitter and Reddit to introduce age checks for users. It says it’s because of the amount of porn on these sites. The government therefore wants Twitter and Reddit to force users to give them passport, driving licence, or bank details to prove their age. Obviously, at present, anyone can use these platforms over the age of 13. And sites like Twitter would have the option to remove porn altogether. But this would really impact sex workers.

    The planned rules will form part of the contentious Online Safety Bill. But the Tories plan to ‘protect’ children is little more than a smokescreen.

    Paul Bernal is a professor of IT law. On Wednesday 9 February, he tweeted about the Tories’ planned changes. Bernal called it a “slippery slope”. He said:

    The real idea is to make the whole internet subject not just to age checks but identity checks. It’s an authoritarian wet dream.

    He also said that it would affect people’s anonymity. And as Bernal noted:

    authorities can determine what content is and is not acceptable is a recipe for disaster.

    Furthermore:

    So, did the Guardian question the government’s reasons for this policy? Did it hell.

    The Guardian: shilling for the Tories?

    Writer Jim Waterson framed most of the article around the Tories wanting to stop children accessing porn. As he wrote:

    Ministers said that social networks “where a considerable quantity of pornographic material is accessible” will have to conform to the same age verification rules as other commercial pornography websites.

    Waterson also noted that:

    The proposed law will see individual British internet users required to hand over a form of identification – such as a passport, driving licence or credit card – to an age verification provider, which would then tell a website hosting porn that the user is over 18. Outlets that fail to prove they have robust age checks could be fined 10% of their global revenue by the media regulator Ofcom, or risk being blocked altogether by British internet service providers.

    He got quotes from people in the age verification business. And he did highlight the potential impact on sex workers and smaller websites. But not once did Waterson mention any of Bernal’s crucial points. Nor did he get comment from anyone with expertise in privacy or civil liberties issues.

    Tories: policing the internet

    As Bernal alluded to, the Tories’ proposed rules for Twitter and Reddit are really about control of the internet. The Canary previously wrote:

    As if censorship on the internet wasn’t bad enough already, the Online Safety Bill will just entrench and further it. It arms both the government and social media companies with extra tools. They could use these to even more actively crack-down on dissent, legitimate protest, and opposition.

    Now, the Tories’ using access to porn as an excuse to restrict Twitter and Reddit adds to this. Not only will this hit sex workers hard, but it also shows our freedoms on the internet are becoming more and more at risk. Now, more than ever, we need an independent critical media, not one happy to whitewash this government’s increasingly draconian plans.

    Featured image via the Telegraph – YouTube and Asvensson – Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Three Metropolitan police officers who worked with Sarah Everard’s killer Wayne Couzens could face charges over allegations they shared racist and misogynistic messages with him.

    “Grossly offensive”

    Prosecutors are considering a file of evidence referred by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) into the “alleged sending and sharing of inappropriate messages by police officers”. Couzens is serving a whole-life order after kidnapping, raping, and murdering the 33-year-old last year.

    The watchdog has sent evidence concerning two serving Met officers, and a former officer at the force, for consideration of offences regarding “grossly offensive material” under the Communications Act. It comes after the IOPC launched a probe into claims they and other officers sent “discriminatory messages” – reportedly racist and misogynistic – over WhatsApp between March and October 2019 after the information was recovered from an old mobile phone found during the police probe into Everard’s murder.

    Wayne Couzens court case
    Wayne Couzens will be behind bars for the rest of his life (Metropolitan Police/PA)

    A Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) spokesperson said:

    We are considering a file of evidence referred to us by the IOPC in relation to the alleged sending and sharing of inappropriate messages by police officers.

    The IOPC said:

    Our investigation into the sending and sharing of inappropriate messages by officers on WhatsApp has been completed.

    We provided a file of evidence to the CPS in December to consider potential offences against three individuals under the Communications Act 2003. We await its decision.

    The Met confirmed the two serving officers are on restricted duties. A force spokesperson said:

    We are keenly aware that the events following Sarah Everard’s death have rocked the public’s faith in us, and we know that we have to work hard and make real changes in order to earn back that trust.

    Every Met employee has been personally emailed by the commissioner about adhering to professional boundaries, their use of social media, and their duty to call out inappropriate behaviour and report prejudice.

    The IOPC has concluded the investigation into another Met officer, one from Norfolk, and one from the Civil Nuclear Constabulary – where Couzens previously worked – but said it is currently unable to comment further on whether it has recommended disciplinary proceedings.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • People’s Assembly (PA) groups are gathering in at least 25 locations across the UK on Saturday 12 February to protest “the extraordinary rise in energy bills”. The campaign group says that because of the massive predicted increase in household bills:

    22 million people will see an annual increase of £693 on their bills, with even more for those on pre-payment meters.

    So PA has organised a series of street demonstrations:

    So far events have been organised in 23 locations to protest the cost of living crisis. Jeremy Corbyn will address the rally in London. The campaign group has put out a call for everybody to get involved. It said:

    Public outrage and the response to the Cost Of Living Crisis is gaining traction so fast that we’re asking everyone to help grow these protests and to make them as big as possible. Please use all your networks and social media platforms to promote and build for events around the UK this Saturday!

    Growing anger at the inequality

    Laura Pidcock, national secretary of the People’s Assembly, said:

    There is real anger at this growing crisis. Working people could not be working harder and yet life is getting so much more difficult. People can see clearer than ever the inequality in our society: that while there are companies making massive profits and the richest individuals are getting so much richer, everybody else is having to suffer, making very difficult decisions to try and get by.

    Older people will be cold in their homes, people will be struggling to feed their children, when none of this is a crisis of their making. Meanwhile, the Government sits by and does nothing to help the people. So, we will be out on the streets saying enough is enough.

    PA said that in addition to the announced rise in energy bills, people are already facing:

    the hike in national insurance, the cut to the £20 uplift in Universal Credit…rising inflation, an increase in Council Tax and rising food, rent and fuel costs.

    It added:

    In terms of how people are able to live and what people are able to afford, this is a crisis. Living standards are under attack and more and more people are having to rely on debt to get through each month.

    Yet still, according to PA, there’s:

    little action from the Government other than their widely criticised £200 off energy bills, which when you read the small print turns out to be a loan…

    Who should join the protest?

    Well, everybody basically. In particular PA is asking trade unions and campaign organisations to encourage their members to attend and “promote Cost of Living demonstrations in their area”. Some have already started spreading the word:

    And trade union leaders are adding their voice to these protests. General secretary of Unite the Union Sharon Graham said:

    This crisis was not caused by working people and we are not going to take wage cuts to pay for it. Why should the public always bail out the markets and policy makers? Where firms can pay, they should pay and under my watch Unite will unashamedly continue to protect the living standards of its members.

    President of PCS Trade Union Fran Heathcote said:

    Low paid workers cannot and will not pay for the government’s problems. The hike in heating bills, fuel, transport costs and National Insurance contributions, at the same time as pay is held down and pensions are being attacked, leaves most workers with a real cost of living crisis.

    Now is the time to get organised, build a movement of opposition and fight back. Please join us on Saturday to demonstrate our anger and determination. By standing together we can change things and help stop the hardship millions are faced with.

    At present protests are taking place at 25 locations across the UK. They’re as far west as Derry in the north of Ireland, as far north as Edinburgh and as far south as Eastbourne and Brighton. But more events are being added “as momentum builds”.

    You can find out details about your nearest protest by going to the People’s Assembly website and clicking on the location for details, or by keeping an eye on its event page.

    What they want people to do?

    PA believe these demonstrations will see:

    hundreds of organisations and thousands of individuals take to the streets, to demand higher wages, no to gas and electricity disconnections and much more. There is a noticeable change in attitude towards the Government. People are turning against them and want proper solutions to this crisis.

    It’s also asking people to publicise these protests by tweeting #CostOfLivingCrisis and #WeCantPay!

    See you on the streets!

    Featured image via People’s Assembly and Flickr/Socialist Appeal

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • An Amnesty report recently concluded that Israel is committing the crime of apartheid against the Palestinian people. Curtis Daly explores the facts.


    Video transcript

    Desmond Tutu: “I have visited the occupied Palestinian territories, and I’ve witnessed the humiliation of Palestinians at Israeli military checkpoints. The Inhumanity that won’t let ambulances reach the injured, farmers attend their land or children attend school. This treatment is familiar to me, and the many black South Africans who were corralled and harassed by the security forces of the apartheid government”.

    Amnesty International has released a report into the crimes of the Israeli government against the Palestinian people. The report was damning and it concluded that Israel is an apartheid state.

    Israeli authorities must be held accountable for committing the crime of apartheid against Palestinians”. That is what was said by Amnesty following the report.

    Titled Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime against Humanity, it found “Palestinians are treated as an inferior racial group and systematically deprived of their rights. We found that Israel’s cruel policies of segregation, dispossession and exclusion across all territories under its control clearly amount to apartheid. The international community has an obligation to act”. Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s secretary general.

    It’s about time a well regarded international body was blunt about this. It’s time to stop pussy footing around: the people of Palestine have been systematically oppressed and murdered.

    Gaza has often been described as an open air prison, where Palestinians live in fear and the Israeli army controls many aspects of their lives.

    Moreover, last year, Israeli forces killed 86 Palestinian children in the West Bank and Gaza, 51 died from airstrikes, and 19 were killed with live ammunition.

    According to Defense for Children Palestine, “since 2000, 2,198 Palestinian children have been killed as a result of Israeli military and settler presence”.

    68,000 people across thirty five Bedouin villages are “unrecognised” by Israel, with no access to water supply and the electricity grid. 

    Israel continues its annexation of occupied Palestinian territories, demolishing the homes of Palestinians and building settlements from which Palestinians are excluded.

    Almost two years ago, then prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then opposition leader Benny Gantz formed a coalition and agreed a deal that formalised the process of annexing the West Bank further, contrary to international law. Although their coalition fell after just a year, it shows that the major parties support the apartheid regime.

    Palestinians are treated as 2nd class citizens. They are denied a nationality.

    Those that live in the West Bank and Gaza have no citizenship, and they must have ID cards issued by Israel in order to wish to live and work there.

    In 2018, a constitutional law was confirmed which declared Israel as the “nation state of the Jewish people”, it also enshrined in the law that the Arabic language is no longer considered official.

    What is happening in Palestine is disgusting, yet any acknowledgement of this has seen a huge kickback.

    Following on from the report, Israel is set to ‘punish’ Amnesty, beginning with ending their tax-exemption status.

    The Jewish Chronicle and The Board of Deputies have joined in on the attack of Amnesty too, claiming that the use of apartheid is a smear.

    Palestinians are cut off from the rest of the world, and much of the mainstream media does not accurately report their plight. Those that do are targeted.

    In 2021, an Israeli military air strike destroyed the offices of Al Jazeera in Gaza – a building that also housed the Associated Press and residential apartments. Those inside were only given an hour to evacuate before the building was flattened. 

    The mainstream media reporting of Israel/ Palestine is nothing short of appalling. According to Media Lens, the Guardian downplayed the Amnesty report. With accusations of anti-Semitism being at the fore-front.

    Antisemitism is a huge problem in society, and of course it exists in pockets on the left, but it has and always will be a prominent feature of the far-right. But the accusations of Antisemitism cannot allow the media to ignore the glaringly obvious apartheid regime. Yet the BBC didn’t feature the Amnesty report on the news at 10.

    Oftentimes, the media debate around Israel/Palestine is reported as a conflict – as a complicated issue in which both sides engage in illegal activity.

    This is a complete and deliberate misrepresentation of a simple situation. Israel is attacking Palestine.

    The US – prominent supporters of the Israeli state – are hypocrites in their selective support for human rights. The Biden administration has no issue in supporting reports on abuses in regards to China, Cuba, and Burma. However, they rejected Amnesty’s report on Israel.

    This fantastic quote from Callamard in the summary of the response to the report shows what needs to happen now:

    “The international response to apartheid must no longer be limited to bland condemnations and equivocating. Unless we tackle the root causes, Palestinians and Israelis will remain locked in the cycle of violence which has destroyed so many lives.”

    She is entirely correct. The response from much of the international community has been pathetic. Those who do stand up to the Israeli government are often attacked, but we cannot let that put us off. We must stand together in solidarity with the Palestinian people and against Israeli apartheid. 

    By Curtis Daly

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • BBC News just gave an unquestioning platform to a piece of pro-Boris Johnson propaganda. It came from one of his new Cabinet members. Of course, his claims were utterly baseless. But the BBC failed to present the other side of the story at all.

    Mark Spencer: already shoring-up Johnson

    Mark Spencer is the new leader of the House of Commons. Johnson promoted him in his partial reshuffle on Tuesday 9 February. Spencer replaced Jacob Rees-Mogg, who is now in a newly-created role: minister for Brexit opportunities. But already, the new face of this important job is peddling unprovable claims.

    Back in December 2021, BBC Radio Nottinghamshire interviewed Spencer. At the time, the Mirror had already broken the so-called ‘partygate’ scandal. In the interview, Spencer defended the PM. BBC News reported that he said in December 2021:

    I am assured that everybody in that building played by the rules. I’m told there weren’t any parties. The prime minister will not have lied about any parties.

    Of course, we now know that may not be true. Because the Met police are investigating 12 different Downing Street/government parties which may have broken the law. Not that this mattered to Spencer. Because on Wednesday 9 February he was still defending the PM.

    ‘The public don’t care about partygate’…

    He told BBC Radio Nottingham in a new interview that:

    When you get out into the real world and you talk to real people, my experience is they are saying to me ‘you know what really matters to me is the cost of my energy bills, the NHS backlog post-Covid, making sure the economy is growing and my job is secure’.

    Spencer added:

    It’s fair to say Downing Street didn’t get everything right but let’s focus on the real world here.

    The hypocrisy of Spencer’s comment about energy bills and the NHS is concerning. Because it’s his government which has caused or is enabling crises in those areas. Moreover, people in the “real world” may beg to differ on Spencer’s assertion that they are less concerned about partygate than other issues. Because since the media broke the partygate scandal, the Tories have nose-dived in almost all the opinion polls.

    … but opinion polling says different

    The latest poll tracker from Britain Elects shows that the Tories collapsed in the immediate aftermath of partygate breaking. And since then, the party has barely recovered. It’s only recently begun to narrow the gap between it and Labour – with the latter still being around eight points ahead:

    As John Curtice wrote for iNews on 3 February, within 48 hours of the redacted Sue Gray report into partygate going live on 31 January, five polls:

    found on average that 63 per cent now believe that Mr Johnson should resign.

    Partygate even divided Tory voters. As Curtice said:

    41 per cent say he should go, 48 per cent reckon he should stay.

    The BBC: negligent?

    So, on the face of it – the polling does not back-up Spencer’s comments. Yet throughout its article, the BBC failed to mention this or counter his comments at all.

    Whatever the editorial reasoning behind this is, the fact that the public service broadcaster failed to present a different side of Spencer’s claims is negligent at best. And it shows the BBC yet again, consciously or not, protecting the systems of power in this country.

    Featured image via BBC News – YouTube and Tahir.Bin.Ibrahim – Wikimedia, cropped to 200×78 under licence CC BY-SA 3.0

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Staff at 68 universities will take up to 10 days of strike action beginning next week over cuts to staff pensions, pay and working conditions. But employers claims Universities have a morally “robust” position over cutting staff pay by up to 100% if they carry out “action short of a strike” during an upcoming walkout.

    Some universities have said they will make what the University and College Union (UCU) described as “arbitrary and punitive” pay deductions, allegedly ranging from 25% to 100% for staff who continue to work during the strike but take action short of a strike (ASOS).

    This can include not covering for absent colleagues, marking boycotts or refusing to take part in voluntary activities.

    “Tantamount to a lockout”

    On Wednesday, UCU said 100% pay reductions in response to ASOS would be “tantamount to a lockout”, leaving staff with no option but to go on strike.

    “Rogue university bosses”

    UCU also claimed:

    – The University of Birmingham told staff that from Monday it will withhold 50% of pay for staff refusing to reschedule classes cancelled due to strike action.

    – The University of Leicester emailed staff to tell them 33% of their pay will be deducted and this could rise to 100%.

    – The University of Durham said it will withhold 25% of staff pay if materials not shared due to strike action are not available to students by March 7, and that the pay being withheld may increase to 100%.

    Last week, the University of Cambridge stepped back from plans to deduct 25% from the wages of staff engaged in ASOS after campaigning by students and staff.

    UCU general secretary Jo Grady said “rogue university bosses” are “trying to intimidate staff from taking lawful industrial action by withholding their wages”.

    This is a deeply unfair and unprofessional response from management which will only escalate and prolong these disputes.

    In action short of a strike, many staff will work strictly to their contract. The fact that some university bosses consider this worthy of a deduction in pay demonstrates the extent to which the sector has become addicted to staff working themselves into the ground and beyond what they are contractually required to do.

    Employers’ response

    Raj Jethwa, chief executive of UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association), which represents 146 employers in pay negotiations, said the decision to cut pay for staff carrying out action short of a strike was a “direct recommendation” from his organisation to employers. Jethwa said:

    Employers are completely within their rights to withhold pay for partial performance – they do not have to accept partial performance,

    When an employee decides to pick and choose what they do it can have a disruptive impact.

    Jethwa said the UCEA had advised universities to cut 100% of staff pay for ASOS and that the institutions were “not only entitled, we think they’re compelled to do so – students will be suffering as a result of this”. He added:

    We’re pretty sure the legal position is pretty robust and beyond that we think the moral position of employers is pretty robust as well,

    Employers at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), City University of London, Manchester Metropolitan University, Newcastle University, the University of Bristol, and the University of Bradford have all reportedly threatened to withdraw 100% of pay for staff taking part in ASOS.

    A University of Bristol spokesperson said:

    We respect the right of our union member colleagues to act where they feel strongly about issues that affect them. However, we need to do everything we can to protect the educational experience of our students, who have faced a great deal of disruption in recent years due to the pandemic.

    With that priority in mind, we will be withholding pay from staff who decide to undertake partial performance of duty. This specifically covers the intentional removal or not sharing of materials which relate to lectures or classes.

    Reflecting other universities in the Russell Group, we will deduct 25% of earnings for staff who choose this course of action, where they self-report or it is brought to our attention.

    Universities UK, which represents 340 employers in the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) pension scheme, said time is running out to complete a 2020 valuation of the scheme, due to finish this month. If the dispute is not resolved, pension contributions will automatically rise in April to “unaffordable” levels, said Julia Buckingham, former president of UUK.

    She said that under UCU’s latest proposition, member contributions to the scheme would go up from 9.8% to 11% of salary in April, and to 11.8% in October. Buckingham said some university staff would be forced to opt out of the scheme because of the increase in contributions, and that employers had said “paying more would have a significant and detrimental impact on the sector’s collective ability to continue delivering globally leading higher education”.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.